LETTER-WRITERS OF THE ROMANTIC AGE

1
LETTER-WRITERS OF THE ROMANTIC AGE
AND THE MODERNIZATION OF ENGLISH
(A quantitative historical survey of the progressive )
René Arnaud
Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot
AVANT-PROPOS
L’étude microdiachronique présentée ici s’appuie sur des relevés qui ont pris une douzaine d’années, pour se terminer
en 1994 *. La fin du siècle a vu exploser la technologie et l’usage des ordinateurs, faisant passer les études de corpus de
l’artisanat à l’âge industriel *. Il n’est pas certain, cependant, que tout soit bénéfice dans ce progrès matériel: le
scanner, par exemple, ne fait qu’enregistrer des signes, alors que le relevé manuel favorise les réflexions sur le pourquoi
et le comment de l’écriture. La lenteur n’est pas sans mérites. Les biographes, ou les historiens littéraires, sont enclins
à oublier les formes; le linguiste froid risque d’oublier les auteurs, leur vie et leurs émotions, dont le texte est un témoin
vivant. Le changement linguistique ne saurait être ni pure inertie ni pure spontanéité: le mouvement psychologique et
social s’appuie sur les virtualités de la structure, mais au service de sa propre téléonomie. La présente étude accorde
certes une importance particulière à cet extérieur de la langue saussurienne: elle n’exige pas cependant qu’on oublie la
part d’autonomie qui définit celle-ci *.
Description et analyse d’un changement majeur qui, plus que d’autres sans doute, conduit l’anglais britannique vers ce
qu’il est encore aujourd’hui, cette étude s’adresse en premier lieu aux spécialistes du langage; mais ceux qui
s’intéressent à la la littérature et au contexte social de l’époque romantique pourront, s’ils veulent bien franchir un
instant une frontière disciplinaire, y trouver eux-aussi quelques renseignements et sujets de réflexion: le titre même les
y invite.
Je tiens à remercier tous ceux qui ont eu leur part dans cette entreprise: Antoine Culioli, pour avoir dirigé ma thèse de
1972, William Labov, pour avoir encouragé cette étude du changement et participé activement à la mise au point finale,
Gillian Sankoff pour son aide. Que soient aussi remerciés mes collègues et amis scandinaves, qui ont si largement
contribué à promouvoir l’étude diachonique de corpus anglais, pour m’avoir fait l’honneur de m’accueillir au
Symposium de 1982, et pour les fructueux contacts qui ont suivi: ceci s’adresse tout particulièrement à Terttu
Nevalainen, Mats Rydén, Magnus Ljung et Erik Smitterberg. Je remercie également David Denison pour son aide et
ses suggestions, Anthony Warner pour d’utiles remarques, Elizabeth Heliotis, Claude Rivière, Paul Veyriras, pour leur
lecture attentive de la version préparatoire et leurs conseils, ainsi que mes collègues et amis de l’Institut d’Anglais
Charles V (Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot).
Janvier 2003.
——————————
* Base de données ROMPROG : environ 22 000 citations codées.
*La faible capacité de mon ordinateur individuel m’a contraint pendant longtemps à diviser cette BD en 22 fichiers dont
le volume ne dépasse pas 5 Mo : un poids-plume aujourd’hui !
* Sur la complémentarité des approches, cf.:
Rissanen, Matti: On Writing a History of English: Variation and Change, 9-12. [Avec une liste des principaux corpora
historiques de l’anglais ]. The European English Messenger, VII, Spring 1999.
Kastovsky, Dieter: On Writing a History of English: The “ Local ” and the “ Global ”, 13-15. The European English
Messenger, VII, Spring 1999.
2
CONTENTS
Introduction
CHAPTER ONE. OBJECT AND METHODS
I.1. General outline
I.2. The progressive paradigm
I.3.The coding frame
I.3.1. Questioning the data
I.3.2. Situation of utterance
I.3.3. Linguistic factors
I.3.3.a. Semantic classes
I.3.3.b. Verb form
I.3.3.c. Subject
I.3.3.d. Object complement
I.3.3.e. Time complement
I.3.3.f. Duration
I.3.3.g. Observations
I.3.4. Sociolinguistic factors
I.3.4.a. Gender
1.3.4.b. Intimacy
4
7
7
8
12
12
13
14
15
20
20
20
21
22
22
22
24
25
CHAPTER TWO: THE CORPUS
27
II.1. Size and contents
II.2. Sampling
II.3. Community grammars and idiolects
II.4. Identifying the progressive
II.5. Data collection
27
30
31
33
34
CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS
36
III.1 Density
36
III.1.1. Overall increase
III.1.2. The two Romantic generations
III.1.3. Apparent time
III.1.4. A study of idiolects
III.1.4.a. Individual total densities
III.1.4.b. Individual trajectories
36
36
37
39
40
43
III.2. Linguistic factors
48
III.2.1. Semantic classes
49
III.2.1.1. State verbs
III.2.1.2. Movement verbs
III.2.1.3. Locative verbs
III.2.1.4. Processes
III.2.2. Verb form
III.2.2.a. Overall distribution
III.2.2.b. Perfect and processes
III.2.3. Development across the lexicon
49
49
49
49
52
52
54
54
3
III.3 Sociolinguistic factors
56
III.3.1. Men and women
III.3.1.a. Overall densities
III.3.1.b. Extremes
III.3.1.c. Diachronic groups
III.3.1.d. Pairs
56
III.3.2. Degrees of intimacy
III.3.2.a. For the whole corpus
III.3.2.b. Diachronic groups
57
CHAPTER FOUR: FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS
60
IV.1. The development of the passive
IV.2. The extended present
IV.3. Time-frame
IV.4. Bounded intervals of time
IV.5. Generalizing progressive
IV.6 State verbs
IV.7. Prospective/retrospective predicates
IV.8. Modal auxiliaries
IV.9. That-clauses
60
62
63
64
67
74
78
82
84
CHAPTER FIVE: LINGUISTICS AND LITERATURE
83
V.1. Individual works
V.2. Trajectories
V.3. Chronological groups
90
92
94
GENERAL CONCLUSION
95
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE COLLECTIONS OF LETTERS
REFERENCES
107
112
ANNEX
The progressive across three centuries
Binary glimpses
List of the letter-writers
Specimens of letters
Degrees of intimacy
The coding frame
Verb lists :polysemic verbs; aspectual classes
Periods and decades
List of figures
120
120
123
127
128
129
132
134
147
148
FIGURES
Index
150
176
4
ABSTRACT
This quantitative survey of the private letters of great writers of the early and middle nineteenth century aims at
assessing the modalities of a major development of English grammar : the considerable increase of the progressive
form between 1800 and 1880. Coded in the database ROMPROG (some 22,000 quotations), it reveals that purely
linguistic factors had a limited weight on it, whereas a strong connection is found with intimacy. Women are ahead of
men in the development. It is suggested that the new existential emphasis associated with Romanticism — in a wide
sense — may have helped in the actuation of a long-term trend, favouring a periphrastic verb-form with strong
situational expressiveness in spontaneous discourse. This is encouraged by convergent symptoms when biographical
data are considered, as well as literature proper. Detailed observations are also given on a variety of linguistic and
socio-stylistic points.
Introduction
The extension of the progressive form ( henceforward “ progressive ” or “ PF ” — this very disputable, but commonly
accepted, name will not be discussed here — is certainly the most dramatic change in the grammar of modern English :
what used to be an occasional feature of the verb-system has now become an essential part of it. After creeping its way
under cover for centuries — there are 10 progressives at most in Tindale’s version of the Gospels and Acts (1534), 49 in
King James’s (1611) —, it jumped into modernity at the time of the Industrial Revolution, synchronous with the
Romantic Age — 700 occurrences in The Twentieth Century New Testament of 1902 .1 The number of progressives per
100 000 words of text has been found a practical approximation to measure the frequency in a time of rapid change 2 :
we will call it density. In the casual style of private letter-writing, the average figure would be a little above 100 at the
turn of the century and 350 or more by the eighteen eighties.
This rough estimate is at the origin of the present study, taking advantage of the mass of private letters which have been
preserved and are still being published, mostly for biographical purposes. Indeed, the century ending with World War
II was the golden age of correspondence. Only literate people are considered, then : is it not a disputable choice ? The
answer is that it is certainly one of the most practical ways, and possibly the best way, of approaching the everyday
language of the past century to assess its history in quantitative terms.3
This survey was carried out along the lines opened by Empirical foundations for a theory of language change
(Weinreich, Labov & Herzog 1968 ) and the methodological and substantive developments which followed.
The five major issues have been clearly stated again in Labov 1982, 2.1 :
the constraints problem : what are the general constraints on change, if any, that determine possible and impossible
changes and directions of change ?
the transition problem : how (by what route) does language change ? ; a question which can be restated as : “ how
can language change from one state to another without interfering with communication among members of the speech
community ? ”
• the embedding problem : how is a given language embedded in the surrounding system of linguistic and social
relationships ? 4
1
The figures are from Mossé 1938.
It was first suggested by Mossé 1938. Nehls 1974 and Scheffer 1975 call it the M coefficient.
3
This has now become the major object of the work of the Helsinki school, in connection with early English
(Nevalainen, Raumolin-Brunberg 1996.) Other possibilities have been explored recently: plays, dialogue in novels,
trials, etc. What we call everyday language is certainly not a homogeneous whole, and the emphasis here is on
practical, given the limitations of the research. More will be said on this subject in II.1 on the corpus. As to the
connection between spoken and written language, there is an interesting discussion in Romaine 1982, 14-21: I would
agree with her that "the function of writing ...is not merely to record the spoken language; writing has an independent
existence" p.15. Familiar letter-writing, however, is probably closer to speech than most genres using the same
medium. Much remains to be studied in this respect for a meaningful assessment of what community language is, in
different societies and historical periods: see e.g. Smitterberg 1998.
4
This is accompanied by the important remark : As linguists we are preeminently conscious of systematic relations :
that a given system will change less or more because of its position in a complex web of oppositions and distinctions.
But it is quite possible that a linguistic change could be the result of a particular cause isolated from the linguistic or
social systems. This means that our common beliefs, justified as they may be, should always be reexamined, at the
macro or microdiachronic level.
2
5
• the evaluation problem : how do members of a speech community evaluate a given change, and what is the effect of
this evaluation on the change ?
• the actuation problem : why did a given linguistic change occur at the particular time and place that it did ? This is
well-known to be the most difficult of all problems − accounting for the sporadic nature of change. As Meillet
1921pointed out , the principles developed in the 19th century deal with the way that changes can occur, but not with
the way any given change did occur...With the actuation problem we are dealing with cause in the most immediate
sense.
This last and, in Labov’s terms, most difficult of all problems, is foremost in the present research, dedicated to the
linguistic and socio-psychological study of an ongoing developement, after it occurred and with the inevitable
limitations due to the distance of more than a century.
Second, the transition problem is also at stake, since we are confronted with the rapid development of a central feature
of the verb-system.
Yet, it is also substantially concerned with the other problems : the constraints problem, because the factors in the
linguistic environment which could be hypothesized as effective have been computed, and two extra-linguistic factors
(gender and intimacy) have also been observed, suggesting tentative extrapolations; the embedding problem as a more
systemic approach of the former. As to the evaluation problem, it has not been specifically studied, but was also kept in
mind : the progressive — some of its uses at least — has been the object of stigmatization in Britain.
The letters so carefully preserved happen to be those of exceptional people — women and men of letters, as they are
aptly called — and their representativity can be disputed. Yet, two observations must be made : 1. Anyone reading
their letters will observe the same uncontrolled style they must have shown — with varying degrees, as for most of us
(see Chapter II) — in their everyday speech among their family and friends. 2. They certainly lack the anonymity of
the “ common speaker ” approach where individualities are lost in the implied homogeneity of a period’s language :
their biographies are as well-known as possible, their other works have been preserved. Whatever will be found in
their ordinary grammar can be connected with their geographical and social background, the story of their lives and
human relations, the books they wrote, etc., for the benefit of both the literary historian and critic and the language
specialist, and perhaps even other students of the humanities and of social science.
In other words, this is not a study of language as an abstract system of universal rules, but a study of the language used
by people, not a study of langue ², but a study of parole , in Saussurean terms.
Grammarians have now almost given up the tradition of quoting examples from the best writers, and present-day
linguists are suspicious, to a fault, of elaborate literary texts. This was a sensible reaction against the artificiality of
“ good language ” as the one and only reference. The modern concept of linguistic communities, with all their
diversity, suggests a more balanced consideration of all strata or sub-groups : should the literary microcosm be left
aside ? Certainly not. There are at least two reasons for this :
1. At a time when more and more people were enjoying the benefit of education, the great novelists of the Romantic
Age, in particular,with their large reading public 5 , exerted on the contemporary language — either directly on their
readers or indirectly through them — an influence we cannot easily evaluate, but which must have been considerable.
If they were not the only leaders, they were obviously among them. The question of whether literature is an accelerator
or a brake is a different question, which studies like the present one may help to answer. This is of interest to the
linguist.
2. As individual persons and writers, the study of their language is fundamental if one believes in Mallarmé’s famous
statement that literature is made with words, and a parallel between the language of their literary works and their
everyday language as evidenced in their letters will always be rewarding.
The idea is not new : in books on “ The language of ... ”, private letters have often been considered. Here, however, the
approach is quantitative and is not limited to considerations of “ style ”. It concerns a major development of English
which it is perhaps not too bold to call its “ modernization ”. How is it that people are gradually led into a new form of
expression, consciously or unconsciously, individually or in keeping with the language community (or communities),
such is one of the mysteries of language that the present survey is trying to bring to light.
5
The number of copies sold is considerably smaller than the number of actual readers. Circulating libraries (Mudie,
SmithErreur ! Source du renvoi introuvable., etc.) bought a large number of them.
6
CHAPTER ONE
OBJECT AND METHODS
I.1.General outline
The present research is supported by a corpus which had to be sufficiently large for a quantitative study of change over
the historical period, considering the many factors involved. In such studies, the inevitable gaps in the data cannot be
filled by intuitive interpolations or by questioning informants. As to other written data (sometimes found in grammars
covering the period), they may hint at virtualities not illustrated by the corpus, but not quantitatively estimated. Even
for a comparatively recent time, we are confronted with what Labov1994,21 calls the Historical Paradox : The task of
historical linguistics is to explain the differences between the past and the present ; but to the extent that the past was
different from the present, there is no way of knowing how different it was. 6
Is it adding a paradox to another to say that the more recent the period studied, the more apt we are to forget the
difference ? Few items used in the middle nineteenth century have entirely disappeared from present-day usage (Rydén
1979,16-17), and the language of that recent past seems to us so familiar that the breach of communication is bound to
occur without us being aware of it as we are when reading Shakespeare for example. In dealing with historical texts we
must never forget this.7
Certainly, it would be a positivist illusion to think that we are dealing with bare data without any theoretical frame to
orient the search. Still, while recognizing the value of a more theory-oriented approach, we consider that too strict a
theory is in permanent danger of, consciously or not, refusing to consider the facts or data that do not fit it. An
observation-oriented theory is of a different nature in the sense that it must be kept open to anything, with the opposite
risk of accepting too readily what is most challenging.
The attempted theory of the progressive proposed in Arnaud 1973 largely inspires the outline in I.2 below, but the
construction of the coding matrix is supported by a large number of converging analyses, from many theoretical
viewpoints.
The hypothesis governing the present survey is not specific to its object but rather a general methodological principle
for the study of change in progress, namely that variation in statistical distributions can suggest which linguistic or
extra-linguistic factors are likely to be responsible for the change. However it is not a replication study, since the
diachronic trajectories of the individual writers are traced from beginning to end : given the length of time considered,
the population has changed, and contributions are diversely weighted.
This is far from the requirements of social or linguistic surveys of the usual type, but the fault, if fault there is, is not due
to systematic refusal of the immense advantages and progress of statistical science, nor to ignorance of its
epistemological foundations, but to deliberate choice. There were two reasons for this :
1. Trying to extract any type of random sample from the corpus implied loss of considerable information and the
multiplication of empty cells : even with our approach, there are still too many of them.
2. By studying the whole population — a non-systematic sample, in fact, of the literate population of England at the
time — and by collecting the corpus in such a manner that it remains available, the possibility still exists for betterequipped researchers to apply statistical and computational instruments to confirm or contradict our findings, or
merely add further precisions.
6
On that point, see also C. Marchello-Nizia 1988.
The breach of communication is easier to overcome for vocabulary items, especially with familiar ( from wafer
Sellotape ) or slangy words − Keats was fond of them −( from filly to broad ), than for grammar.
7
7
Another serious objection might be raised : in the study of a phenomenon so often presented as a binary choice between
simple and progressive forms why not a binary, “ variable rule ” study ? Three answers can be given :
1. A practical excuse : so great is the disproportion between the occurrences of progressives and non-progressives (of
the order of 2 per cent at the beginning of the period), that a careful coding of all relevant factors for the whole verbsystem would have implied an amount of work beyond the powers of an individual worker ;
2. The natural counter-reply is that this could have been done, or can still be done, by a team of qualified researchers,
or/and that instructive conclusions could be drawn from more limited binary studies (considering for example, only
simple past forms, or present+past forms, or perfect forms, etc.). This alternative choice could be quite justified and
rewarding : see ANNEX for a few attempts in this direction.
3. More seriously : the binary view8, which we often think obvious, is far from covering the network of syntacticosemantic relationships involving the progressive. The schema presented in the following section gives an idea of it. It
has long been noted that the binarism illustrated by the Prague school — Roman Jakobson above all —, originally in
connection with the phonological system, must be seen with more diffidence when grammar is in question, especially
in the case of a wide-ranging phenomenon.
To sum up, this is a quantitative survey of a corpus of 19th century private correspondence with a view to an estimate of
the distribution of progressive forms, in connection with a set of linguistic and extra-linguistic factors, over a century —
1780-1880 to give the approximate limits. It is not meant to support a particular theory, either of language or of the
history of language, but to provide factual observations with the ultimate object of understanding the conditioning of
this change, and possibly to give some lights on the mysteries of change in general.
I.2.
The progressive paradigm
The literature on the progressive is considerable and will not be discussed here. There is no element of the linguistic
system which is not involved, but, for the modern period, aspect and aktionsart are commonly referred to. Starting
with Aristotle’s famous statements, down to Vendler’s renewal (1957, 1967), and the discussions it originated, they
have often interested logicians as well as linguists. The former are even more prone than formal linguists to rely on
intuitions and ad hoc examples. To mention just a few disputable considerations, the idea of activity is often referred
to... and yet what about such common progressives as standing, waiting or hoping ? Sentences with animate/human
subjects are repeatedly quoted ... yet what about everyday expressions like it’s raining, the wind is blowing, the eggs
are boiling ? Then the diachronic dimension is commonly overlooked. Without developing a complete theory, we will
give a brief survey by considering first the formal auxiliary system and second the semantics of the BE-ING syntagm
known as the progressive form.
a. The auxiliary system : the following sketch focusses on what appears to have been the auxiliary system, involving
aspect and voice, when the progressive developed in 19th century English. The slow semantic change which leads to
present-day meanings can be inscribed into it and the quantitative survey may help to understand the direction it has
taken and is continuing to take. It seems to be mostly connected with modality and the relation of speaker and speech
which French linguists (Benveniste 1961, Culioli 1981, 1995 — see Groussier & Rivière 1996) have studied under the
name of “ énonciation ” (cf. also, Wright 1994a, Smitterberg (forthcoming) ).
8
It is almost as old as the discovery of the progressive form as a verb form. Undeniably, this is what language users feel
as a rule. In her often-quoted study, Hatcher 1951: 262 writes: "First, since the problem must be the contrast between
our two constructions, both constructions must be studied with equal care." Practically all grammarians followed this
advice since then. I don't claim that they were wrong, but only that, apart from questions of feasibility, it may obscure
some of the problems.
8
The following graph may be helpful for an understanding of the periphrastic forms of the English verb using the
auxiliaries BE and HAVE.
Prospective viewpoint
---------------------------------------------->
1
2
3
a. BE
TO
-ING
-EN
b. HAVE TO
-ING -EN
<----------------------------------------------Retrospective viewpoint
The morphological auxiliary-system connects the two primary auxiliaries (their complementary function in many
languages is well-known) and three verb-forms :
• TO-infinitive (with its original directional value, in space and time) ;
-ING (also found in gerunds, verbal nouns or adjectives) ;
-EN, “ past participle ” form, also used for passives, “ passive participles ”9 and adjectives.
The table illustrates :
• vertically, the complementary use of BE and HAVE.
There is an extensive literature on this point : let’s simply say that BE usually refers rather to what is conceptualized as
“ internal property ” or “ attributes ” (of an Aristotelian “ substance ”) : she is beautiful and charming ; whereas HAVE
concerns “ external property ” : she has beauty and charm: this example to show that, often, the choice, with possible
semantic shift, is left to the speaker : cf. also : a wealthy man v. a man of property .10
• horizontally, the sequential system of intervals or phases through which a (perhaps Eleatic) “ body ” in motion or
in a process of change (natural or induced) inevitably passes, that is from a “ before ” to an “ after ”. This is
relative to the position of the speaker.
In our everyday perception, things are certainly more clear when there is a tangible result : the house is built. They are
obviously less so, and restricted by modalities, when they are seen in prospect : anything can still happen before the
end is reached.
The progressive refers to the intermediary stage between project and accomplishment, the inside of the process, so to
say, what is “ going on ”, to use the common phrase. We have to remember that this is a metaphor and that intrinsic
movement is not necessarily implied : we are staying here. The point is so often forgotten that it might be useful to
speak of “ temporary localisation ” or “ temporary occupation ” 11.
This last remark reminds us that the various meanings obtained at the different phases must take into account the
meaning of the verbs involved, since their aspectual functioning varies accordingly : if we speak of processes, we shall
have to ask ourselves whether staying, waiting, living (in its two main senses), and even knowing, thinking, loving... are
processes (or activities), and of what sort. The semantic status of participants may consequently be different : agent,
cause, etc. for the “ subject ” (first argument), patient, intermediary, goal for the first complement (second argument),
etc. Extensive discussion of all this lies outside the present work.
This being said, the above system can be used as a practical device to build a variety of sentences : some of them may
have been fairly common in 19th century English and are often exceptional or obsolete in present-day English.
For example, in column 1 , line a, we will obtain sentences like :
9
The term was fairly common in 19th century grammar : Cf. Lindley Murray (1795), a grammar often reprinted.
On this account, ordinary language is not as strict and accurate as grammarians would like, and some uncertainty is
part of everyday communication, just as our perception of reality can shift between levels of abstraction according to
whether we are engaged, for example, in action or reflection − Cf. Bergson, Matière et mémoire, 1896, p.173-81 −
whereas the activity of the linguist is professionally language-centered and reflexive.
11
The term occupation is suggested by Alexander Bain 1863. This famous disciple of Stuart Mill, and the founder of
Mind, wrote a treatise of logic and a grammar. He writes: "This peculiarly English form enables us both to confine an
action or a fact to the present, instead of extending over all time, and to intimate that the agent is now engrossed, and is
barred from other occupation". Like many others, he considers only agent-subjects, and also forgets that a person may
have two "occupations" at the same time : and now I am sitting writing in such a pretty dining room (Gaskell, 1848,
Letter 18). That was not an unusual expression at the time.
10
9
we are to paint the house-front to morrow / the house-front is to paint ( cf. :we are to kill a pig soon. J. Austen).
Line b will generate :
we have to paint the house front / we have the house-front to paint.
Only when the system has been tried with a variety of items can we really assess its functioning. Some rearrangements
occur ; one is well-known,the shifting from :
we have a letter to write /we have to write a letter.
The same alternation of BE and HAVE can be tested in column 3, where it is perhaps even more clear :
the house-front is painted / we have painted the house front.
It has often been shown that, in many European languages, there happened a reordering :
we have the letter written/ we have written the letter.
Just in passing, notice that line b does not seem to be valid for column 2. We do find :
the house-front is painting
but not normally, in standard British English :
?* we have the house-front painting
nor the reordered expression :
• we have painting the house-front.
Yet in 19th century English we find :
Henry Inglis has had my book reading (Carlyle);
they have the plan of a Great Council simmering already (G. Eliot, Romola).
And also :
we have staying with us a Mr Robinson (Wordsworth)
the Irishwoman whom I had working for two days (Carlyle) :
sentences which, if not entirely excluded today, would be rare.
This suggests a potentiality which did not happen to be fully grammaticalized.
intermediate stage is more difficult to conceptualize as “ external property ”.
The reason might be that this
b.Semantics of the progressive : the graphic representation above is meant to illustrate that what we now call the
progressive is an ambiguous development of the verb system. The conventional distinction of verb-phrase and nounphrase as separate items, in Indo-European especially, is still a much-debated point. Let’s only recall that English -ING
forms, as well as -EN forms — the history of their development is well-documented — have a spectre of meanings
between verb and noun : hence the usual names of adjective, verbal substantive or gerund for some of them — or
nominalizations in generative grammar —, progressive form of the verb or present participle for others. Some
“ adjectives ” in particular, not always easy to distinguish from verb-forms, obviously describe states or occupations
seen as temporary : a smiling girl does not always smile, a sleeping horse sometimes wins a race. With the progressive,
something similar takes place, which most grammarians have observed. In general terms, leaving aside later
developments, the “ simple form ” is synoptic (a term borrowed from Close 1959) ; also quoted by Ota 1963 : 60), that
is to say it concerns an act, an event, an accomplishment sometimes, seen as a whole. Many authors have stressed that
point, but in terms not always perfectly clear. By using the auxiliary BE (in the sense of exist − the “ existential
quantifier ” of formal logic ; cf. also da sein in German, estar in Spanish, tà in Irish, etc.) the progressive is not so much
concerned with the act itself as with the “ involvement of the subject ” (Hatcher, 1951), and its (or his/her) temporary
condition : the subject IS what it is doing, or experiencing, etc., for the span of time considered. 12
12
In present-day English, it is next to impossible not to use the progressive in the definition, which becomes circular. So
that, when trying to devise tests to study the constraints for the use of this form, many have observed that you
sometimes have to beg the question. The situation can be the same in the Spanish of bilinguals in the U.S. Cf. Flora
Klein 1980 : The question : " Que hacen esos chicos alla afuera ?"(they are waiting at an employment agency) is
wrongly interpreted. "It was thus intended to refer to X − the moment of speech itself − and it was so interpreted by
Spanish monolinguals, although the question was phrased in the simple present form. Spanish-English bilinguals,
however, usually interpreted this question as referring to Y (the general present), in accordance with English usage, and
10
Descartes’s famous cogito ergo sum is usually translated by the simple form : “ I think therefore I am ”. Probably
because it dates back from the 17th century, this translation has survived. Philosophers certainly have their opinion
about that and even if we might count on probable support from Husserl, let’s not trespass on their ground. However, in
contrast to its more synthetic formulation in the Méditations métaphysiques, a translation of the phrase in the Discours
de la méthode using the progressive : “ I am thinking, therefore I am ”, would be a clear expression of its existential
force. Notice that, in the Méditations, Descartes underlines its temporary iterative meaning, as distinct from a general
essentialist sense : “ il faut conclure, et tenir pour constant que cette proposition : Je suis, j’existe, est nécessairement
vraie toutes les fois que je la prononce, ou que je la conçois dans mon esprit ” , Méditations métaphysiques..., Paris
1647 ; Paris : Gallimard, 1941 (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), 167. This would further justify a modern translation by the
progressive ; but, at the time, the actualizing, or iterative, sense was normally included, in English, in the ambiguous
simple form.
Typical in that respect are expressions concerning the weather : it’s raining, snowing, etc., which have the same force
as an adjective (windy) or a nominal expression (there’s a storm) — Cf. it’s cold, beside it’s freezing — since they just
describe the state of what we call the weather, a sort of mythical entity the Greeks eventually called Zeus. Typical also
the binomial constructions mentioned below in section I.3.2. when the two forms are used in succession, the first
referring to an act, the second to an action for which the subject (agent or cause) can be held responsible. Notice that
this is valid even for non-animate-non-human subjects (the falling roof is clearly a transform of the roof is falling) ;
which does not mean that animate and human subjects are not a majority in fact. Notice also that what we call act for
want of a better term (event, or “ happening ” being perhaps less obscure) does not imply activity of an agent, or a
cause, nor does it imply purpose : if we want the term to cover all the cases where we find a verb-form either
“ progressive ” or not, all we can say is that it “ takes place ” in time. As a matter of fact, that common expression
“ take place ” is revealing of the epistemological priority of space. This would be the linguistic expression of the
existential quantifier of post-kantic formal logicians, who were actually formalizing what is found in ordinary language.
This can be connected to an existential ontology. But, as stated above, the present work cannot afford to develop a full
theory of the system.
When looking for some basic meaning of the progressive — to be adapted to the various contexts and situations — that
“ temporary adjectival ” value must be considered as central. Expressions like subjectivity (Mossé, 1938), involvement
of the subject (Hatcher, 1951), etc., were largely intuitive analyses for what can be inferred from the logic of the
auxiliary system, at least in modern usage.
This may well be the reason why the progressive became, unconsciously and by degrees, a more personal, more
intimate way of referring to events of one’s or one’s relatives or friends’ existence, easily transferred to other subjects
and extending in many directions to give a sort of emotional colouring to one’s prose. History can be a narrative of dry
events, where protagonists are not in the foreground ; a letter addressed to close relatives and friends is a picture of
one’s existence and feelings.13 Speaking of old theories we can also mention Parmenides. The Ancients had noticed
how difficult it is to account logically for movement : hence Zeno’s famous paradox. Aristotle− there have been many
discussions concerning aspect based on his developments in the Physics − suggested a partition of time as a sequence of
discontinuous periods : touto yar estin o kronos, arithmos kiniseos kata to proteron kai isteron, the number of
movement according to the before and the after : Physics 219b, 1,2. Cf. Collobert 1994. A statement using the
progressive is a description of the condition of the subject “ for the time being ”, knowing that it won’t last for ever.
From there originates the telic-atelic distinction, and the need to adapt the analysis to the semantics of verb-classes. For
the space of time considered, it qualifies the subject in the intermediate stage before accomplishment or mere
termination. This does not mean that the act itself and its purport is ignored, but it is not so prominent as the
“ involvement of the subject ” (Hatcher 1951) : On reading a letter from someone close to our heart, we are more
interested in the person than in his or her achievements as such. Perhaps should we say that they are actions rather than
acts, though they are both at the same time. It would be begging the question of course to say that the letter replies not
to “ what did you do last week ? ”, which might be the object of a business letter, but to “ what were you doing last
week ? ” It may interest Mrs Gaskell whether it was a blue or a green dress her daughter Marianne bought : but what
really matters to her was whether Marianne enjoyed her shopping, how pleasant or unpleasant were her occupations.
so as "What do those kids out there do ?" As a result it often provoked surprise, presumably because applicants at an
employment agency are assumed to be unemployed."
13
Cf. the contrast evidenced by Benveniste between "history" and "discourse", with the French simple past (aorist) used
for the former and the passé composé for the latter. Even when a speaker relates events comparatively remote, the
connection with his own self and the moment of speaking is foremost when the passé composé is used in written
French. It is history alive so to say. This periphrastic tense using the present form of ETRE or AVOIR , before it also
became used instead of the simple past in the spoken language at least, used to stress "present relevance" in the same
way as the English present perfect. In French classical tragedy (Corneille, Racine) it was used to differentiate what had
happened during the time-unit of the dramatic action (passé composé) and what had happened at a more remote time
(passé simple).
11
This to mention a typical case. The overall orientation is more pervasive and goes beyond individual sentences, not
always consistently, with the tentative randomness of what Labov has called the variable rule.
This focussing on the subject, mostly felt when it is the sender or the addressee of a letter, but eventually extended to all
predications, may be the reason of what we suggest to call spontaneity − effusiveness can be another term −, a
dimension responsible for the variations we find in many places in the corpus, either between individuals or at different
moments of an individual’s life. The point will developed further : see General conclusion.
I.3.
The coding frame
A fairly large number of factors, of various kinds and weights, are suspected to govern the use of the progressive : they
are listed in the coding matrix : see ANNEX. Most of them are well-known ; some, however, are seldom accessible in
written texts. They can be listed under three headings : speech situation, linguistic and sociolinguistic constraints. A
few points were also included for practical reasons, and the decimal system led to a few breaches in the consistency of
the numbering. This is a research frame where the ordering of elements does not claim theoretical significance.
I.3.1. Questioning the data
Although, as we said, the quantitative research hypotheses must be kept sufficiently loose and open, a certain number of
assumptions inevitably lie in the background. Here are some of the legitimate hypotheses which the research was
expected to verify.
1. Concerning linguistic factors, it was assumed that the development was differentiated with reference to the
syntactico-semantic system of the verb.
a.
Tenses, voice and modality : it was expected that the increase primarily affected intransitive or unbounded
perfect forms (present and past perfect, the second not merely a transfer of the first), probably in parallel with the
decrease of the BE-perfect with intransitives (Rydén & Brorström 1987). This does not preclude synchronous
development with other tenses, and also voice and modal collocations (the label Ts is just a practical abbreviation). For
the least commonly affected of these, it can be enlightening to have more precise data on the rise of the progressive
passive and the dwindling of the old equivalent and on the development of the diverse modal forms from very modest
origins.
b. Predicational verb-classes : the development of the progressive with what are called “ state ” verbs is a 19th century
novelty, or almost so. How did it affect the various sub-classes is one of the questions to be raised.
But the major question concerns the aspectual semantics of verb-classes. Considering that the original progressive often
had a strong connotation of “ middle voice ”, it was hypothezied (on the basis of pilot surveys in Arnaud 1973) that its
development would affect primarily unbounded, non-conclusive, predications. Given a reasonably satisfactory
assignement of all individual predications to the appropriate class or subclass, the corpus should be sufficiently large to
provide confirmation of the trend, and of how it affected the different subclasses.
c. A certain number of other suggestions, less central, will be developed below : Jespersen’s “ time-frame ” theory ;
the development of present forms (or their transposed equivalents in past forms) referring to events in the (supposedly)
near future or past ; the presence of explicit contexts implying duration, whether discontinuous (iterative) or
continuous,and even generic statements, contradicting the analysis of the progressive as strictly limited to the interval of
the instant. In the same line of thought, the ascription of a terminal boundary is sometimes said to block use of the
progressive : instances of it can however be found, requiring further study. Another occasion when it appears difficult,
apart from reported speech, to use the progressive, is when a declarative verb is followed by a that-clause or an
equivalent object-clause.
d. Given the strong association of the progressive with deictic factors (in an enlarged sense), it can be useful to observe
how it is connected with “ person ”, and more generally, with determinacy of the subject.
e. Apart from their distribution into predicational aspectual classes, lexical verbs have been computed individually,
with due consideration given to homonyms (polysemic verbs). This is not without risks on the theoretical level, due to
the elusive semantics of individual words. For the present purpose, what counted most was to be consistent for all the
extension of the corpus along the periods surveyed. The idea was to test whether the change affected all words (verbs)
at the same time, or whether there was some sort of lexical diffusion. This now well-known theory (see Labov, 1981,
1994) has been opposed (mainly by Wang and Chen − Wang 1977 − and the research which followed) to the
neogrammarian doctrine of phonetic change affecting, “ mechanically ”, all words at the same time (with the wellknown exceptions of dialect borrowing or analogic change). It is not obvious that the competing theories apply equally
well to grammatical change, especially with many parameters involving different levels of analysis. Yet, it was not
unreasonable to think that the progressive spread, so to say, “ contagiously ”, over the lexicon of verbs, along lines
12
which can be related to the classes we have discriminated, but possibly also along other dimensions..14 The aim was
probably too ambitious, but we might expect the survey to help in unveiling some of the mystery of diffusion over the
language system proper. We know, however, that vocabulary (tokens of the lexical types) is strongly linked to the
needs of the speaker, and that, especially in the case of the progressive, a situation-bound form, this is largely
unpredictable and haphazard. Let’s however note an interesting point, seldom, if ever, noticed by grammarians: new
verbs (neologisms) very commonly appear in the progressive as soon as they are introduced. A list will be given in
III.2.3. but we can already mention : (I am) calomeling, daguerreotyping (Ruskin), and also the use of the progressive
with compounds of the type house-hunting, where nouns first, and then verbal nouns or gerunds have certainly preceded
the progressive proper, which looks like a back-formation.
The various points mentioned above should not be, if possible, treated separately, and could be subjected to multivariate
analysis, or at least to bivariate surveys including, for example, a separate study of the perfect utterances involving
unbounded predications.
As to the sociolinguistic (or socio-stylistic) factors, the labels speak for themselves.
Only part of this ambitious programme could be contemplated within the limits of the present work.
I.3.2. Situation of utterance.
Most studies have noted that the progressive is sensitive to the speech situation. This point could be studied in the
sociolinguistics section, but it is so inescapable that present-day formal linguists have introduced it − sometimes under
the heading of pragmatics − in their analyses, so that it seems better to mention it in a separate section. It is indeed one
of the tenets of the énonciation approach, partly reflected in some of Jakobson’s views (on shifters, for example),
initiated in France by Benveniste, and more recently associated with the name of Culioli 1981, 1995 − Groussier &
Rivière 1996. To put it briefly, it emphasizes the insertion of speech in space and time, a topology of reference with the
énonciateur (utterer), an abstraction of the traditional notion of speaker, as the origin of the speech process. It differs
from the speech situation of the sociolinguistics tradition (Hymes, Gumperz, Fishman, etc.) in that it tries to rely only
on whatever trace the operations of the utterance process have left in its product, the utterance proper. Faithful to the
doctrine of the autonomy of linguistics heralded by Saussure, it is an attempt to formalize what can be observed in
situated utterances, without falling into the traps of philosophy on the one hand or of sociology and psychology on the
other. Still, it does not preclude them : the narrow diffidence of some structuralists of the Bloomfieldian tradition
definitely hostile to “ mentalism ” is no longer maintained and we can walk across boundaries once tabooed. Even
linguists not sociolinguistically-minded, or even those averse to sociolinguistics, cannot conceive of language use
completely dissociated from the physical and microsocial conditions, however abstract the picture they eventually give
of them.
Broadly speaking, in the case of a person writing to a friend or relative, the speech situation, in sociolinguistic terms, is
clear and well-defined. A typology of letters − or of sections of them − could be attempted : mere communication of
ordinary news, comments of various types about people and events, occasional disquisitions on political or literary
matters, more or less passionate outbursts, confidential revelations, expressions of friendship and love, the list could be
long and profuse. Here, for practical reasons, it has to be deferred. We will be satisfied to accept that the situation of
utterance is that of a normally one-to-one and one-sided written exchange −not forgetting howewer, that letters were
often addressed to several people of the same family, or could be read by other people, with or without the consent and
knowledge of the writer. This plurality of addressees or readers − perhaps (see below, III.1.4.) responsible for the
cooler tone of Macaulay’s letters to Hannah after she married, for example − is one of the inevitable facts that the letterwriter has to accept, just as the ordinary speaker-hearer exchange may be overheard or, to-day, tapped on the telephone.
Of this, the sender can be aware or not, and may write accordingly. As a matter of fact, it does not seem likely that our
letter-writers were commonly writing consciously for the public or for posterity as Madame de Sévigné did. Some may
have suspected that their letters were not only kept − a common practice even for family letters − but shown to other
people. Then, when the sender had become famous, letters were even published, and some writers resented that as a
breach of confidence. Wordsworth, for example, made it known, in writing, that he absolutely prohibited publication of
his correspondence even after his death, especially when he learnt what use had been made of Robert Southey’s letters,
of the publication of Coleridge’s and of the proposed publication of Charles Lamb’s letters : it fills 7 volumes in
14
Contagion can also be the word when two or a series of progressives appear in a given context, a fact which may
sometimes introduce a bias in the count. This phenomenon has been kept in mind, and on the whole, its incidence is not
very significant. With literary texts, it may be part of a "periodic" effect, in argumentative discourse for example, but
also of other contrived or unconscious manifestations of "style". Guillemin-Flescher 1981 has carried minute and deepreaching research into such points, which cannot be captured by the wide-mesh net we have to use here
13
Selincourt’s edition !15 But let us appease our conscience by remembering that this prohibition concerns the content
rather than the grammar of the letters. As to whether this grammar itself is affected by the awareness of a certain degree
of publicity, we are left without a sure guide to give more precision to the notions of privacy, intimacy, familiarity.16
And the only thing we can say is that such niceties of epistolary interchange have to be neutralised for a mass study.
Two typical points, fairly easy to distinguish, must however be noted as significant examples of sensitivity to that
complex of physical and social factors defining the individual situation of utterance. The first is well-known, though it
has only been brought to light in recent times, with occasional mention of the progressive as one of its distinctive
features : the performative utterance. Before Austin, Koschmieder 1935 alluded to it under the name of “ coincidence
predication ”. As well as it excludes other persons than the first, other tenses than the present, it also excludes the
progressive. Perelman 1962 − the analysis is in French − speaks of a soldier refusing to obey :
(1)
“ I refuse to do this ”.
An officer is called, and − this is my personal contribution − may ask (in English if that was the language spoken) :
(2)
“ Are you refusing to obey ? ”.
Whereas (1) is performative, (2) is merely constative, to use Austin’s terms.
The officer might have dispensed with the progressive, only saying :
(3)
” Do you (really) refuse to obey ? ”
However, by using the progressive, he emphasizes the responsibility of the soldier, who becomes definitely a
disobedient soldier, someone who deliberately endorses his disobedience, who is not merely responsible for his act, but
for an action (see above in the semantic study), for his conduct. A performative is a “ synoptic ” act with aspectotemporal coincidence of initiation and result, with no interval in-between − and actually the clearest case of a punctual
event, by definition and without any need of difficult and disputable measurement. It is also something that alters the
social order, however minutely, as when we say “ thank you ”. A conduct is less fact-oriented : the word itself refers to
the judgments we may pass on a person ; eventually it alters the person : from conduct to character the step is
sometimes narrow. Apart from deeds of different kinds from ordinary citizens or people in power, most performative
utterances are oral. In private letters, we will of course find expressions like “ I promise to reply soon ”, “ I
congratulate you on ... ”, etc.
The question here is whether the progressive can occasionally be used for performatives. It’s a matter of definition :
exclusion of the progressive can be a defining factor of performatives, a commendable stance if we follow Benveniste’s
1966: 267 advice.to avoid the traps where Austin himself was liable to get caught. Such traps are easier to avoid when
one relies on the evidence of the linguistic context. If a policeman says : “ I am arresting you ”, a form which has been
heard, though rarely, we may safely assume that he is not strictly following his official guidebook, finding perhaps that
the set-phrase is too abrupt, and for various reasons, probably unconscious, prefers a more personal utterance, speaking
as a man rather than as a police constable. He might also say : “ I am going to arrest you ”, another milder form for an
occasion not usually considered as mild. We could speak of understatements in such cases, and, supposing they were
brought to Court, lawyers and judges should have to consider whether some breach of the law had taken place.
Another less notorious case where utterance factors are prominent was already explored by Charleston 1941,1955. We
find it in sentences of the type : “ When you do A you are (“ actually, in fact ”) doing B ”. There are few instances in
the present corpus as clear as, for example, the following from Trollope (Barchester Towers) :
The archdeacon perceived that he would be making a false step if he allowed the cathedral clergy to give the bishop just
ground for umbrage.
But we can mention :
15
"For my own part, I do most earnestly wish that not a single letter I ever wrote shall survive me: and I shall
endeavour to make it known to all my correspondents, whether accidental or regular, that such is my wish: and farther
that I shd deem a breach of the laws of social intercourse as I wish them to be maintained, between me and my friends
and acquaintances, if either they do not destroy my letters, or send them to myself or representatives." Letter to Edward
Moxon, his publisher, 10 Dec. 1835.
16
In this order, perhaps: privacy would stress the confidentiality of the letters, intimacy the affective link between
addresser and addressee, and familiarity the tone and style of the writing, irrespective of the personal relationship: this
is why "degrees of intimacy" has been preferred for an estimate of a social, not a stylistic factor − which would be
begging the question.
14
In coming down to Scotland therefore Terry would be leaving a position in which... (Scott, 1828)
but I feel that, in writing thus, I am merely flattering myself (Macaulay, 1855);
I am not using mere phrases when I say that (Eliot, 1858).
Buyssens 1958 called this “ interpretation ”, and Adamczewski 1978 found in such explicit sentences support for his
own extended theory of the progressive as “ secondary mention ”, even when the first non-progressive clause is absent.
In the same manner as for performatives, whereas the first clause concerns an act, the second takes it up as action, or
conduct. The emphasis is then shifted from the event and its consequence to the subject (normally human) who is
responsible for it. In logical (and juridical) terms, it is then open to judgment : whether it is the action itself or its
author (agent, cause, etc.) which is liable to it is another matter. In Courts of Justice, however, people and not events
are tried.
The two clear situations above are in fact the only cases when utterance factors can be easily detected in private letterwriting. The first one can be neglected, since performative utterances normally exclude the progressive ; but a separate
count was taken of verbs which are candidates to be used in such situations (declarative verbs : Joos 1964 called them
“ asseverative ”). The other, the “ interpretative ” binomial sentence, has been noted : the number of instances is small,
but they are easy to locate, since the contextual element is so clearly identified that we are verging on syntax proper. It
is safe to assume that present-day English developed this explicit or implicit binomial type further.17
Other points normally studied within the framework of formal contextual factors, morphological or syntactic, obviously
refer also to the speech situation (person and tense for example) : there is indeed a continuity. Since we are dealing
here with writings, it is all the more easy to obey the scholastic dictate of the structuralists that a linguist ought to
consider only what is formally present in the utterance.
I.3.3. Linguistic factors
It must be clearly repeated that the framework of the survey is a research framework, a wide mesh. Many of the points
raised are still the object of discussion, and it is hoped that the enrichment of the data provided by this collection will
help in solving problems of an often very wide scope. The general semantics of processes, for example, implies, among
others, cognitive considerations beyond the limits of an individual language.
Inevitably, however, even a tolerant approach cannot fail to reflect some of the convictions of the researcher. One of
these is that meaning is a continuous process involving at almost every moment all the components which linguistic
analysis obliges us to consider separately, with the inevitable risk of artifacts18
I.3.3.a. Semantic classes
For the sake of simplicity, we will speak of “ verbs ” to mean predications. We assume that each occurrence of a verb
form involves a basic value which is actualized in the predication.19
A point, not negligible but secondary, is that of homonyms (see ANNEX for a list) : they have been counted separately,
of course. As lexicographers know, it is not always easy to say when you have two “ verbs ”, e.g. call : hail or visit (
also said of a ship) or two meanings of the same verb call : hail, name − there are puns on this homonymy− ; here, they
have been considered as three separate verbs, as well as labour meaning work or suffer ; but a different decision could
be justified. Like lexicographers, we had to be practical, and it was felt that what mattered most was to keep to the
same decisions throughout, which is not always so easy. A few illustrations are given for each class : they just give an
idea of semantic niceties it was not possible to discuss in detail. Some of them will be considered in the appropriate
section.
Homonyms can usually be clearly discriminated in context. But specific “ aspectual ” values also pose problems. In
the large majority of cases, there was no occasion to doubt, but some contexts can be ambiguous.
The semantics of verb predications with respect to use or non-use of the progressive have long been studied by
linguists. They give only examples, however, whereas we, like lexicographers, have to include all occurrences in the
table for computation. The classification given here reflects a long history of discussions on the semantics of aspect, as
old as Aristotle, but, in recent times, dating mainly from Kenny and Vendler’s famous typology : see I,2. We will not
discuss it again, and will only give some guidelines.
17
See König 1980. I am indebted to Eric Smitterberg for this reference.
Semantics, syntax, morphology are the common names for the main components but we should also remember that, in
the case of a typically spoken form, considerations of stress and intonation may intervene; and we usually know little of
how they were used at the time in any given utterance.
19
Figures refer to the coding of these classes and subclasses (See ANNEX).
18
15
The main consideration is that of “ telicity ”, a label now in common use, though other terms have been used such as
cyclic v. non-cyclic (Bull, 1963), terminative v. non terminative, bounded v. unbounded, or simply state v. action, etc.
The labels are not always satisfactory : as exposed above in I.2., for example, the idea of activity is often deceptive (are
sleep, glow, starve, freeze activities ?) ; the label “ state verbs ” could apply as well to verbs such as sit, reside, or tarry,
or perhaps wait, and Arnaud 1973 had suggested to call “ relative ” (relational) verbs those implying a stable
predicational relationship, relying on the distinction epistemologists like Jean Piaget have made between relation and
operation.20 To avoid ambiguities, some (Joos 1964 for example) have also suggested “ status verbs ”. Let’s keep the
simplest and most usual term.
State verbs :
In terms of aspectual value, they can be said to form normally unbounded predications, or, more accurately, that the
consideration of bounds is irrelevant. If, as many grammarians of old, beginning with the Alexandrians, rightly
observed, the verb is an adjective plus BE, the copula is to be taken here in its essential sense, as defining a notional
meaning which is not changing so long as the universe of discourse remains stable : when we say my tailor is rich, or he
owns a house in Savile Row, we are not concerned with the fact that this will not last eternally.
State verbs (or state predications) are an important class inasmuch as they are said, and have long been said, to be
averse to the progressive, to the point of being completely immune to it. The question is still open whether this
immunity is absolute − if a case is found, then it is traditionally allocated to another class, a very usual pedagogic
device, for example with have a good time, a meal, etc., where have is said to be an action verb : take is a common
gloss. Since we have no possibility of elicitation to confirm or disconfirm the labelling, it has been found safe to record
all instances of such verbs, so that exceptionally for this particular class we have listed verbs (lexical units : for a
complete list, see ANNEX) rather than predications ; further analysis will eventually lead to another ascription.
Given the sensitivity of this class, it was separated into subclasses for more detailed analysis. Generally speaking, such
verbs are so seldom found in the progressive that individual study is always possible. One of the benefits of extensive
surveys is serendipity : aside from the general purpose of the search, a few interesting individual discoveries may be
made.
01 : Relational/statal : verbs of the be/have type. The relation of inherent or external “ property ” they construct has
been extensively studied, and, as a matter of fact, serves also as a semantic or diachronic background for the study of
be and have as auxiliaries. Notice however that the stability of the relation can be implicitly limited, for example when
we say : Do you have your car ? or even Do you have a car ?21
Among many interesting cases , we will only quote the following :
It’s being Papa’s busy day (Gaskell, 1855)
we think that we shall be having a peace with a new Ministry (Dorothy Wordsworth, 1804).
02 : Declarative : (asseverative, Joos 1964). It is probably due to the fact that many of them enter into performative
utterances of everyday use that they can be said to be state verbs. Any consideration of duration or bounds is irrelevant
in this case, since there is coincidence between the statement and the act, just as in performatives. There are borderline
cases, however : suggest, for example, can be seen as a process. The following are illustrative of the well-known
problems of performative versus constative utterances, especially because they are here at the first person of the present
tense (see below in IV,9) :
On the whole I am promising to occupy myself more wholesomely (Carlyle, 1833);
(of course I am supposing the bare information given and left to the child to work upon) (Eliot,1847).
03 : Cognitive : this label could be disputed in cases like believe, but it was found necessary to keep the number of
subclasses to a minimum. Some linguists (Joos 1964 again, after Hill 1958 ) have included them in the class of
“ private verbs ”, meaning that, if they correspond to operations, such operations are not open, not perceptible, and we
have to rely on the speaker for their truth-value : in this sense, believe is not different from declare. Here again the
existence of bounds is irrelevant, but here again, there are dubious cases, especially among perception verbs : see and
hear are a fixture in school grammars where the notion of class-cleavage and the distinction of perception v. activity are
traditional. But, apart from the fact that this is an ad hoc, pedagogic, device, are we sure this applies to 19th century
use ?
I went out for a solitary walk and was finding myself tant soit peu tired of my dear little companions (Thackeray,
1851).
20
Admittedly, a relation results from an operation: even cognition implies discovery, acquaintance implies becoming
acquainted, you cannot see something if you don't look at it, etc.
21
Yet the question has been put also for a Manx cat's tail: does a Manx cat have a tail ? speaking of an attribute more
permanent and even definitional.
16
If you are seeing that honoured woman will you kindly mention this little fact to her ?(Eliot, 1880).
04 : Affective : the label fits. It is well-known that feelings can change with time, but it is not part and parcel of the
definition of love to be transitory, any more than for the less emotionally-loaded like. We will see that love can be a
difficult case, too easily dismissed by some grammarians who speak of Don Juanism (who is he loving now ?) and such
things :
. Two years ago, three men were loving her, as they called it (E. Barrett-Browning, 1846).
05/06 : Prospective/retrospective : the distinction appeared useful, but the two may be fused since there is only a small
number of lexical items implying retrospective orientation, which can be studied individually. The names
“ prospective ” or “ retrospective ” speak for themselves : they correspond to a disposition of the subject, normally
human, whose mind − or attention, or intention − is directed towards an event of the future or the past, sometimes
figuratively. There is always a boundary to it, a goal, but this goal is an event not named by the verb itself. Notice that
it may seem to be not an event but a thing, a person, an object as it is aptly, with etymological accuracy, called ; but
actually when one says : we are expecting Sara to-morrow, it is Sara’s arrival which is expected. When you stop
hoping for something, it is not because that something has happened, but because you have lost hope, as we say. So, in
the basic meaning of such verbs, the notion of bounds is also irrelevant. In retrospective verbs, the situation is different
but in any case bounds are not part of the meaning of the verb proper. Both classes often have an emotional component,
positive or negative, so that they could be a subclass of affective verbs. However, prospective verbs, with subjects
normally human or metaphorically so, are time-oriented, and are, consequently, a borderline case of state verbs : in
ordinary terms, they do not aim at a result or a term, but at a target. This leads to an aspectual contrast (before and
after) not altogether very different from many process verbs. They have been ascribed by analysts to the class of state
verbs, probably because they cannot easily be identified as processes, and are supposed to refer to “ mental states ” :
they are “ private verbs ”(see above). But the distinction between “ mental states ” and “ mental processes ” is a
difficult one. They constitute an original class, to be considered separately : a borderline class. Results will be all the
more instructive.
We are dying to know what that book is (Dickens 1845) ;
Now as I know you must be gasping for European intelligence (Scott, 1802) ;
for everyday I have been hoping it would be restored to me (Gaskell, 1853) ;
The Bearer of this note is meaning to call upon you (Wm. Wordsworth, 1836) ;
the ...Tranquillity, for which we had been sighing (Coleridge, 1832) ;
We are starving to hear something about our chits (Mary Wordsworth, 1839) ;
I was thinking of trying the ponies in the Park (Robert Browning, 1846).
10 : Locative verbs : they are easy to identify and form a comparatively manageable class. In terms of lexical items,
they are not very many. Perhaps some verbs like wait (for), especially for etymological reasons, should have been
included here : this is again a borderline case, or a case of class-cleavage. Generally speaking, locative verbs signify
position, connection of the subject to some point in space, so that they could be said to be just avatars of be when it
means be here (da sein, estar, etc.), “ exist ” in space and time. As we said above, they necessarily imply temporary
state 22 : any such state will eventually and “ naturally ” end to give place − notice the traditional phrase − to a different
position or posture, although this subsequent state is not its “ aim by definition ”, any more than waking up is the aim of
sleeping. It is a vicious circle to say that one of the ways of defining the class is its easy compatibility with the
progressive so that we will not mention it. To conclude, some members of this class could also be included among
unbounded processes : lie and sleep are close to each other, as well as the two meanings of live (be alive and inhabit).
However, the emphasis is on location in one case, on activity in the other, if the idea of activity is stretched to include
sleep for example. Similarly, there can be some ambiguity between descriptive and locational value, since positions in
space, especially for animate beings, are usually accompanied with a descriptive feature : lying, stretching, crouching,
etc. Conversely, there are few activities or processes that do not occur in space as we conceive of it. A few illustrations
− notice the use of stop in the sense of stay, very common at the time :
buried in the same mass of fog and rain in which I had been living for weeks (Macaulay, 1834);
I must tell you of one of the young women who were remaining in Prison voluntarily, until we could take them (Dickens,
1847);
but we are now roosting for a little while here (Eliot, 1872);
Is Fleming stopping at your house ? (Thackeray, 1852).
22
It must always be understood that it is up to the the speaker to define his universe and what he considers as stable in it
or not, at the expense of misunderstandings with other people. On some of the puzzling uses of the progressive with
locative predications, for example, there are interesting suggestions in Ljung 1980: 128 sq. The classification proposed
here concerns referential predicates first, and cannot from the start take interpretation − in a wide sense − into account.
Questions connected to it will be discussed in IV.5.
17
20-21 : Movement verbs
As a rule, movement here means motion from one place to another, more or less distant. Yet, it also includes what is
clearly perceived as movement without change of position. The epistemology of movement is notoriously difficult :
can rain, blow or bloom be said to be movement ? 23 We have tried not to extend the notion too much : external activity
nearly always implies movement, and even internal activity of the mind or soul has sometimes been treated as
movement, not only by poets, but also by philosophers, psychologists, neurologists, etc. But the class is nevertheless
one of the clearest, and some movement verbs, particularly common in the progressive, do not call for justification :
walk, go or sail in their usual sense for example.
Movement verbs, according to the well-known dichotomy, have been divided between bounded and unbounded
predications. This is one of the most significant instances when the allocation has to be made in context. A
characteristic example is go : it may mean unbounded movement (go on), or movement oriented to a goal even when
the latter is not explicitly mentioned (let’s go home ; let’s go).
This class of bounded or unbounded predications has long been recognized as particularly receptive to the progressive.
Whether it is still recruiting the largest battalions or dwindling in comparative size is one of the objects of the search.
30 to 33 : Processes
Movement verbs are actually just a subclass of processes (called activity verbs, in some descriptions)24.Whereas the
typology of movement, in spite of some diversity, is relatively clear, the typology of processes is an endless and
sophisticated catalogue where confusion of all kinds is apt to occur.
Fortunately, the only thing we are concerned with is their aspectual properties. With some reluctance, and only because
it is always easier to fuse unnecessary distinctions than to open new classes once the survey is complete, a
discrimination has been attempted, within unbounded processes, for a subclass of “ descriptive ” verbs (scarcely
deserving the name of processes in its usual sense) :
I have no need of an enchanted wax figure to duplicate me for I am melting in my proper person before the fire (Keats,
1820) :
Farmers are prospering beyond want (Carlyle, 1855) ;
I saw him several times while he was labouring under the disease (Macaulay, 1837).
Another has been suggested among bounded processes, distinguishing those which are clearly “ progressive ”, that is to
say “ step by step ” : this being in accordance with a common notion of the progressive as “ developing activity ”,
which certainly fits with this class. Recover, intransitive, is in this respect not very different from repair, listed here
among ordinary bounded process verbs :
Add to this that they are repairing the front of St Mark’s, (Ruskin, 1845),
yet, a repair can be more or less instantaneous, whereas recovery is seldom so, and, as mentioned above, all operation
verbs can be said to be progressive.
Walter is recovering from his attack (Scott, 1829) ;
Mrs Elliot has been very bad but is mending (Thackeray, 1850) ;
We French say Comment vas-tu ? whereas the English expression is How are you ? − cf. also Spanish como esta ?
On the use of a "progressive" by Aristotle, Cobb 1973: 84, experienced some difficulty in accounting for the Greek
equivalent of walk : "he [Aristotle] argues in this passage that walking is a type of activity, X, which is distinguished by
the fact that one cannot say that that something Xs and has Xed at the same time"... "the foregoing interpretation of
Aristotle's point in Metaphysics θ 6 only makes sense of what he says in the text by adding a qualification to the
predicate "...walks" − viz. "from Founders College to the Scott Library". In French, you don't really need that
qualification if you use aller : we cannot say at the same time : je vais et je suis allé..., since aller necessarily implies
directionality (apart from the set phrase above and metaphoric meanings : les affaires vont bien) , which walk does not.
Yet, in the perfect expression, a place complement is normally needed. Note also the colloquial or dialectal : j'y ai été:
cf. I was there (once). It would seem that static or dynamic expressions concerning our existence are sometimes
interchangeable: il allait rêvant, les difficultés vont croissant, she went singing, she sat listening. Some light could be
shed on the apparently contradictory use of the progressive with both locative and movement verbs by a thorough study
of such expressions.
24
Incidentally, this may be due to the fact that we cannot conceive of processes not taking place − note the phrase − in
space; and space is clearly included in our spontaneous conception of movement, which has not been disturbed by
Einstein. Conversely, space (and time) could justifiably be considered as being, phylogenetically or ontogenetically,
derived from movement: this is still an unsolved debate.
23
18
Wheat is expected to be very dear and wool is rising (Hutchinson, 1811) ;
He is protracting his stay at Penang as long as he can (Macaulay, 1835).
The following :
I was fast ripening a plan (Coleridge, 1808)
might as well have been included among prospective utterances, which shows once more that classes cannot be tight.
Unbounded processes are activities which do not imply a goal or result : they just have a termination, but it is not part
of their original meaning. We say that the earth revolves and that the sun shines, and we have some reason to think that
this is not really eternal, but yet we do live as if it were so, as well as we accept that water boils in certain conditions as
a physical law, hence situated in space but with no conceivable interruption or exception. Interruption, if it occurs, is an
accident. This is the largest class, so that the quotations below are just indicative :
They were acting Figaro (Carlyle, 1836) ;
I was admiring the banks of the Rhine (Macaulay, 1853) ;
We have been amusing ourselves with Lady Morgan’s “ Princess ” (Edgeworth, 1835) ;
We are living the old life just as if we had never known Paris (E.B-Browning, 1853) ;
I am puzzling my way about a poem (Scott, 1812) ;
in one town of which (Douglas) the Cholera has been raging - it is now happily abated (Wordsworth, 1833) ;
And a slight cough which is teazing me helps to make me think (Eliot, 1863) ;
for I am yawning over the parliamentary part of the Register work (Southey, 1809).
Bounded processes, on the contrary, have their conclusion built in. It can be positive (build) or negative (destroy).
Operations, with identified agent or cause, leading to a clear and tangible result are not the only bounded processes,
although it is often a matter of definition : hurt or kiss, e.g., are borderline cases 25, and context will help in solving the
uncertainty. Progressive processes (see above) are theoretically bounded processes, but their goal is shifting and can be
delayed : learning tends to a result, but, in a large number of cases, who can say that anything is definitely learnt ?
grow is more clearly bounded, but not always : one even grows old, after being a grown-up.
The decision whether to consider a given utterance as a bounded or an unbounded process is often a difficult one. In :
the Tenant had been burning heather (Welsh, 1833),
there is a definitely conclusive process, the Tenant was obviously aiming at the result. But in :
4 or 5 candles were burning before us (Mary Wordworth, 1820)
whereas we know that the candles will be burnt out sooner or later, people did not light them for that purpose. There
are many such cases, so that we must repeat that this is a heuristic research frame, leading to suggestions or directions
for further study, rather than to clear-cut solutions. The following quotations are also indicative :
while the house is being altered (Eliot, 1871) ;
I write at odd minutes when the horses are changing (Edgeworth, 1813) ;
Our Dressing-Table is constructing on the spot out of a large Kitchen Table belonging to the House, for doing which we
have the permission of Mr.Husket, Lord Lansdown’s Painter (Austen, 1807) ;
Margaret is cutting more teeth (Southey, 1803) ;
The Picture is of great merit and is now engraving (Wordsworth, 1840) ;
In a year...I shall be furnishing my cabin (Macaulay, 1836) ;
I am seriously hurting myself in devoting my days...(Coleridge, 1818).
Read is a case in point :
We have been reading Darwin’s book on the “ Origin of Species ” just now : it makes an epoch (Eliot, 1859);
can we be sure that George Eliot and her companion G. H. Lewis had read Darwin’s book throughout ? Yet, they
probably had, since G. Eliot ends with an appreciation, and this is why the utterance was included among bounded
processes ; but the opposite choice could be justified ; and a verb like read could be treated as referring to an
unbounded process in whatever context : we cannot say that a book is “ read ” in the same sense as in a house is built.
A general semantics of verbs, or of the notions eventually taking the form of verbs in English, would be a Promethean
task. The only thing to offer to the critical reader is to provide lists for each class : they will be found in the ANNEX.
25
A special case could be made when result (effect) and action are in coincidence: she was hurt (affected) by my
conduct; isn't this boring you ? aren't you bored ?...
19
A last word to say that metaphoric meanings −they are frequent : “ whither are we going ? ”, would Wordsworth say,
speaking of the condition of England − have been treated like non-metaphoric ones.
I.3.3.b. Verb form
This term covers the morphological verb system (conjugation) inasmuch as it concerns the use of the progressive. Due
to the decimal system of coding, it has been found expedient to concentrate on the major points of the system and to
dispense with subsections where we know the number of progressives is small at the time of reference : infinitive,
passive, modal auxiliary collocations, etc. With a small number of occurrences, more refined analysis will be easy if it
is found useful.
I.3.3.c. Subject
This concerns the determinacy of the subject. The distinction human v. non-human or animate v. inanimate was not
coded : it can usually be inferred from the person (except the third) and the meaning of the verb itself, and it is quite
safe to assume that the progressive is found mostly with animate subjects and human subjects. This does not mean that
inanimates, or perhaps entities outside that dichotomy like the wind or other natural elements have to be overlooked, as
they too often are.
The coding of persons is interesting and easy : Ota 1963 has noted that it is not indifferent to consider person in
studying the progressive. 26 When we come to the third person, it may be useful to note whether it is definite or
indefinite. This is a difficult question and it has not been judged necessary to enter into fine distinctions, often out of
reach in our texts. Some contexts are ambiguous : one may refer to “ oneself ” or to “ anyone ”, for example. It is
usually easier to see whether a definite article refers to an individual or to a class : in both cases it has been treated as
definite. In practice, it has not been found useful to develop this point at the present stage of the research.
I.3.3.d. Object complement (object)
Definiteness of the so-called “ object ” complement is a more difficult matter. “ Object ” is taken in a very general
sense : the second argument in the predication, where the first is usually called the “ subject ”. 27 Again, it is not here
the place for sophisticated discussions : for example is the “ included object ”, “ object of content ” (Jespersen) a real
object (live a life, sleep a sleep, etc...) ? Is mile dans walk a mile an object or a spatial “ circumstance ” ? etc.
Interesting as they may be, such questions have little weight in the quantitative analysis : they may be deferred for
further investigation, for which the study provides elements.
However, it is not always easy to say if an object is determinate or indeterminate, a useful guide for the allocation of a
given predication to the right class of bounded or unbounded process. She wrote letters may mean that she was a letterwriter ( e.g. Jane Welsh-Carlyle, in a dictionary of British authors), or that she wrote (was writing in present-day
English) an unspecified number of letters at a given moment. Usually the context makes it clear, but not always. For
example in :
he had been writing letters, ... when he was summoned (Gaskell, 1858),
we can assume that there was a definite number of letters, some of them at least completely written ; but in :
I’ve been writing Pen all the morning (Thackeray, 1850),
Thackeray obviously does not mean that his novel Pendennis was completed, whereas the following quotation is at least
ambiguous :
I have been writing letters without one moment’s cessation, from breakfast till now (Thackeray, 1856).
It is commonly assumed that using the progressive, especially with the perfect tense, implies that the activity may not
have been completed : but this is begging the question. A common verb with the same sort of ambiguities is read.
26
Among what are usually called state verbs, he considers a separate subclass of verbs of perception or mental or
psychological state, which he calls I-verbs (those which have been called "private verbs" by Joos and Hill: verbs which
"occur much more frequently with I/we as subject (both in statement and in question) or you as subject (in question)
than with you as subject (in statement) or a third person subject (both in statement and in question)" p.73. This gives
formal support to the definition of "private verbs" whose "static meaning is not easily compatible with the dynamics of
the "process" indicated by the progressive form" p. 85.
27
This refers to the formalisation given by Culioli of thepredicativesystem: a ternary system of the type XRY, where the
relational central element R (in our case, the verb) connects two arguments, X and Y, which only deserve the traditional
names of subject and complement when the relation becomes oriented (for ex. active v. passive, etc.). According to the
semantics of the notions involved, the nature of the relationship (mere event, processes of various kinds, etc.) may
considerably vary.
20
The other items under this heading are sufficiently clear. Some groupings were inevitable. In the list, we also find
predicative adjectives or nouns which correspond to a subclass of verbs : look is a clear case (you are looking fine
today), differentiated from the original sense of seeing. In this section, thanks to a comfortable capacity of the decimal
matrix, some distinctions have been kept which may not be useful for the first general approach, the object of this
study, but could shed light on future refinements.
I.3.3.e. Time complement
Apart from the usual reference to the ternary division of the time-line (past-present-future), three contextual and
situational elements have been noted. Iterative and continuous values have been put together because they are often
impossible to discriminate − the second is the infinitesimal limit of the first − and above all because they can usually be
inferred from the meaning of the verb rather than from the adverbial phrase when there is one. Even always can be
iterative when smoke cigars or take medicine is the verb, whereas it is clearly continuous with flow or shine speaking of
a river or the sun. To these two values has been added the generic meaning, which deserves special notice since it is
normally not congenial with the progressive. Yet it has been found in a number of conspicuous cases, precisely those
exceptional occurrences grammarians find precious to the point of exaggerating their significance ; for example :
a man, while he is courting a woman (Coleridge, 1819) ;
I live under an everlasting restraint − Never relieved except when I am composing (Keats, 1819) ;
in any of the thousand ways that fortune is ever offering (Carlyle, 1823) ;
Generals, ... and misses and sailors, are taking the air perpetually in its walks (Macaulay, 1814).
This point will be developed in IV.5.
Jespersen’s description of the progressive as providing a time-frame has long been one of the tenets in the discussions :
this is why it was included in this section, to see whether it is so common as has been claimed. Similarly, it has been
found interesting to survey instances of extended present, in the sense of “ dilated ” around the point of utterance. The
label seems more comprehensive than “ imminence ” or “ immediate future ” by avoiding an idea of proximity which is
always debatable, and is sometimes ascribed to psychological time − a valid concept in this case −and also by
considering sentences when just, for example, extends to contiguous future as well as to recent past according to
circumstance. In any case, the use of the progressive for extended present is a conspicuous development at our period
and could be a feasible subject for a binary study of change (see ANNEX for binary glimpses).
I.3.3.f. Duration
The idea of duration, once commonly used in connection with the progressive, must be treated with diffidence,
especially when it is based on the meaning of the verb, from punctual to extended. When there is no explicit context,
one has to take into account psychological time, an interesting, but elusive notion. The concept of intervals is basic in
the study of aspect, but there is no clear necessity to inquire further into their length, or their internal structure. It
happens however that the context, a safe guide in this respect, contains expressions of duration. This is somehow
connected with iteration, continuity and generic value by validating a time-space, bounded or unbounded.
I.3.3.g Observations
This was a sort of “ observations or remarks ” column, always useful in a research of that kind. Individual, remarkable
quotations may thus be retrieved, disputable cases eliminated thanks to further reflection. Only one point which could
not easily find its place elsewhere has been put here for convenience’s sake : the “ old passive ” forms (the house is
building) − to use a practical label. They might have been inserted with ordinary present or past forms since they do not
differ in form, but only by the semantics of subject-object orientation : we still accept without reservation that the water
is boiling is a normal active form, whereas the dinner is cooking is said to be a relic of the old passive. By noting such
outdated forms we hope to bring some light on this problem and to give some information on when and how the new
passive was substituted for the old one, so systematic in Macaulay’s historical books.
This summary sketch is far from a thorough discussion of all the semantics of the verb and its environment. We have to
repeat that an exploratory survey aiming at the discovery of trends cannot be cramped by too strict guidelines. What is
valid for the study of individual sentences may not be rewarding for an overview of a large number : in other words,
whereas some theoretical views are inevitably orienting the research, the horizon must be kept sufficiently open. In
particular, we must beware of notions arising either from our experience of present-day English or from the analyses we
have been exposed to. This is not altogether so easy.
I.3.4. Sociolinguistic factors
21
The traditional methodology ( D. Sankoff 1978, and later developments) considers a matrix of linguistic and extralinguistic factors, the latter essentially sociological. Yet, some are not strictly so, being rather the reflection in the
utterances, spoken or written, of macro- or micro-sociological conditions : this is why we speak of sociolinguistic
factors.
In a survey of 19th century correspondence, one would like to find some social stratification28. The early Victorian
English society happens to be the one which was the subject of Engels’s The Condition of the Working Class in
England, published in German in 1845, in English only in 1892, where the picture is not very different from those given
by the Unitarian Mrs. Gaskell in North and South. 29
This research is not concerned with such discussions : for a summary overview, see for example Best 1971, Phillips,
1984. They cannot be ignored, however. After due consideration, it was found that, in a society which was far from
classless, the social group available for the study was fairly homogeneous as a sample of the larger set of literate
people. A sophisticated analysis might discern subtle shades in the general colour : Wordsworth was not an aristocrat
like Maria Edgeworth or even Scott, Thackeray haunted circles where Carlyle felt ill at ease, etc. But this would
ultimately lead to describing the social or geographical background of the individual writers, hinting at what a finely
stratified survey would provide if it were feasible, not to real sub-groupings.
Pierre Bourdieu 1982 and passim (see also Encrevé et al. 1983) rightly insists that even in todays’society the language
people speak and write is part and parcel of their place − a typically Victorian notion − in society and of their valuation
on the “ linguistic market ”. Extending this view to the English 19th century society and to the people who actually
wrote letters regularly without the help of an amanuensis, it is not difficult to draw the following picture.
Generally speaking, there must have been two sorts of such people : those who wrote with fluency, and those who did
not, simply because their schooling had been insufficient. Notice that among the latter were some men and women of
the upper class or upper middle class. Desclaire 1973 : 487, n.25 noticed that, so far as expression was concerned, some
aristocratic ladies of the 18th century were often far from being as literate as their clerical mentors and were sometimes
as illiterate as their servants or Tabitha Bramble and Win Jenkins in Smollett’s Humphrey Clinker : “ L’ignorance, ou le
mépris de l’orthographe, procèdent d’ailleurs du peu d’importance que les classes supérieures de la société attachent
au savoir et à la culture...Mary Astell remarque que 30 “ as to spelling which they are said to be defective in, if they
don’t believe as they are usually told, that its fit for ‘em to be so, and that to write exactly is too Pedantic, they may
soon correct that fault... ” . The quotation is from Mary Astell, A Serious Proposal to the Ladies, for the advancement
of their true and greatest interest, by a lover of their sex. in 2 parts, London, printed for R. Wilkin, 1697. But aristocrats
were so secure about their social rank that, as a rule, they simply did not bother. Not being a historian, the present
writer is not qualified to pass judgments on that matter : but it seems plausible that Lord or Lady So and So, or
Fielding’s Squire Western for that matter, naturally considered that nice language, and correct writing, were for the
parson at the low end of the table, and happily forgotten once they no longer had to be whipped for it. This intuition is
endorsed by Phillips 1970 : 14, speaking of the Verney and Wentworth ladies’correspondence at the beginning of the
eighteenth century : “ The Verneys and Wentworths wrote a “ prelapsarian ” English, as it were : their sentence
structure was not so much incorrect as non-existent. No one then expected a lady, however nobly born, to write other
than as she spoke, with, in Henry Tilney’s words [ a character in Northanger Abbey ], “ a general deficiency of subject,
a total inattention to stops, and a very frequent ignorance of grammar ” ”. This probably does not apply to all upper
class people, but must have been true of a number of them, especially of women. It is then reasonable to expect that
their letters should be a valid testimony of the way they spoke, mutatis mutandis. This seems to have been the situation
in the early 18th century. But the development of instruction certainly changed such attitudes: Dr Johnson’s lessons had
reached a wider audience − Cf. Leonard 1929 −, and the upper class are more and more to include among the fully
literate set.31 This source of information, not negligible, would not be considerable and as instructive in the nineteenth
century.
28
Recent studies have enriched knowledge on this important point, but mostly with reference to the earlier period: cf.
Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg 1996.
29
Disraeli also, a Conservative dandy, gave in Sybil, or the Two Nations, a picture of that divided society ? "Our
Queen reigns over the greatest nation that ever existed. "Which nation ? ... "for she reigns over two"..."Two nations;
between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other's habits, thoughts, and
feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets; who are formed by a different
breeding, are fed by a different food, and are not governed by the same laws...'THE RICH AND THE POOR" Sybil,
Chapter V.
30
"The ignorance or contempt of spelling result indeed from the limited concern of the upper classes for knowledge and
culture. Mary Astell observes that" [ my translation].
31
Incidentally, when they wrote letters and those letters have been kept, it would be advisable to check whether they
were actually written by the person who signed them. When Mary was amanuensis for William Wordsworth, often
suffering from his eyes, we have no reason to suspect the authenticity of his expression, except that she may have
22
At the other end of the social scale of the literate, we have what we might call the semi-literate : people who are trying
to write as best they can, and will not write many letters. This simply because they don’t have the time, because the
post is too expensive even after 1840, and they don’t have correspondents as literate as they are. 32 Going further into
the subject would imply a study by qualified historians of early popular letter-writing in Britain. 33 Interesting insights
would be obtained, but the corpus would be hard to gather and probably of small size. This is one of the reasons for
leaving it aside, at least provisionally. But there is another reason : Labov, with typical sensitivity to people’s reactions
and to linguistic insecurity, observed that, when people have to control what they are saying and the manner they are
doing it, they are unpredictably and erratically moving between extremes of possible laxity and what is now known as
hypercorrection. This means that such data is hardly reliable as a sample of community grammar.
A clear case is to be found in the letters addressed by the joiner John Overs to Dickens, kept by the Free Library of
Philadelphia, in Dr. Jacques Benoliel Collection in the Rare Book Departement (S.M.Smith 1974.) Here is an extract of
the first, a long discussion of Carlyle’s book Chartism.
July 20th, 1840
“ My dear Friend
Subdued by a fit of spleen − or rather perhaps, I should say usurped by a snarling fiend of discontent and despondency
which occasionaly [sic] obtains the mastery I know not why or wherefore, I dare not venture to convey to you certain
remarks or rhapsodies which have arisen in my mind partly from your conversation, and partly from the digestion of
the book by Thomas Carlyle entitled “ Chartism ” which your kindness has enabled me to peruse. I have therefore
waited till the murrain passed away, which I hope you will recieve [sic] as an apology for the all unconscionable time
that I have detained your book, and which I herewith return with many thanks...
... And now, my dear Sir, my tediousness is at an end ; I have given you the views, faithfully, of such working men as I
have associated with, as recalled to memory by the book of Thomas Carlyle’s, for the perusal whereof I again sincerely
thank you. I have told you I do not mix myself with these matters, because they are unprofitable, unsatisfactory, and
irritating to my somewhat quiet and studious disposition ; but I can neither be blind nor deaf to what is going on about
me ; therefore, if there be any matter connected with, or concerning the working man on which I have cursorily
touched, the which you should like to have resolved, I shall have much pleasure in furnishing such information as you
demand.
Having the honour to be
Your very grateful and devoted servant,
John Overs.
Sometimes the constraint will not be due to incapacity of the writer to write normally and even faultlessly − Overs’
English is reasonably good, with a few misspellings only : he was a lettered man wanting to write a novel − but to the
social status of the addressee, often, as in the case of Dickens, felt as intimidating, in a society where submission and
condescension were key words − witness Mrs. Gaskell’s Cranford and many other descriptions. So that, with
condescending carelessness at one end, and humble hypercorrection at the other, the two extremes of the literate class
are deviations from the community grammar we are looking for in the first instance. 34
Then we come to the question of whether Writers in the full sense of the term are to be trusted. Again, one answer
would be that we have little or no choice, but the other answer is that, due precisely to their mastery of language, they
suggested alterations, etc. But we very well know, and see, that politicians often read the speeches written by others.
The magnates of the past also had private secretaries.
32
Apart from the possible influence of manuals of good letter-writing and of what popular letter-writers had learnt of
"style" in the literature available, for example the rhetoric of love-letters or of religious effusion, or again of passionate
entreaty when asking my Lord for a favour.
33
The situation in France in the 19th century has been studied by Chartier et al. 1991. The French Post-office had the
idea of an extensive survey of letter-writing in 1847, before a reform introducing a uniform tax of 20 centimes whatever
the distance: among other things, it shows that eight or nine tenth of the letters were business letters.
34
This is not to say that the extremes are negligible, of course. It could be suggested that grammar books take variety
more into account by adopting a title in the plural. What there is in common is certainly larger than the variations we
may encounter. Yet, if we believe in the consistency of system, such variations justify the plural: we might speak of
"Grammar" on the one hand, and of "grammars" on the other, to underline the ordered heterogeneity which Weinreich,
Labov and Herzog 1968 consider as the inevitable conditioning of change. After all, this is a less unattainable target
than the quest for universal grammar, the Holy Grail of modern linguists.
23
are more apt than others to forget it when they are not writing literature, just as a dancer will walk with natural ease
when he is not dancing. 35
This is what intuition as well as the practical experience of reading their letters suggests, anyhow. That it should not be
carried too far is also true. From place to place we meet with some more elaborate paragraphs, according to the subject
matter, which, for men and women of letters, inevitably included literature or philosophy, politics or religion, art, etc.,
or also according to the personality and interests of their correspondents : whereas Mrs Gaskell’s letters to her
daughters were mostly those of a mother speaking of everyday life (planting flowers, buying dresses, receiving visitors,
etc.),whereas Wordsworth’s letters to his publisher Moxon spoke largely of the practical aspects of publishing, some of
Macaulay’s early letters to his friend Ellis were full of scholarly considerations, and Carlyle, usually concerned with a
variety of everyday occupations (including the provision of clay pipes from Scotland, which, unfortunately, were
broken during the transport, or of potatoes and butter in barrels ), did not fail to indulge in some of his customary moral
ejaculations on the futility or even sins of the times ; so, for that matter, did Wordsworth, and... Cicero, one of the most
ancient letter-writers, speaking of barbatuli juvenes. We cannot abstract the style and language of people from the
circle where they live and their various occupations of body and mind. This is true for oral practice as well, and there
are micro-situations of speech which ethnomethodologists or other students of social interaction have carefully analysed
(Erving Goffman is an outstanding example). Here we are dealing with a large corpus of letters involving a variety of
people and circumstances and the neutralization results from the mixture of many speech events which form the flow of
ordinary exchange, in writing as well as in speech. To conclude, the written language we are studying is that of a set of
educated people who were not extraordinary at every moment of their life. Incidentally, Wordsworth’s idea when he
published The Lyrical Ballads, was that of concentrating on the common life of common people, and another Romantic,
Victor Hugo, when he said : “ Ah insensé qui crois que je ne suis pas toi ! ” had similar democratic conceptions. How
far was this an illusion is another matter, but the Romantics as a group were not averse to spontaneity and naturalness,
even in their literary works. Each in his own way, of course. All this means that letter-writing at the time of the penny
post, or just before, is to be considered as a fairly homogeneous “ genre ” : individualities, idiosyncrasies sometimes,
will emerge, just as in oral conversation, when people stammer of repeat set-phrases − Dickens is celebrated for his
keen observation of such tics − , but the overall tendencies of community grammar will be little affected, especially
when the item studied is not perceived as a stereotype.
Since no class or group discrimination was justified, only two sociological or sociolinguistic factors have been taken
into account : gender and intimacy with correspondents.
I.3.4.a. Gender : there is no real need to postulate a fundamental difference in mental nature and behaviour between
men and women to try to assess whether they differed in language use in a given society. As many works and studies
have shown, men and women were brought up differently and their lives were much more separate than they are now :
Mrs Gaskell’s novel Wives and daughters, for example, is a vindication of women’s rights to learning. It should
however be taken into account that the women whose letters we are reading are even more exceptional than the men :
apart possibly from Mary Wordsworth, they are strong personalities, each in her own way. Some of them led a life
which met with censure at the time. George Eliot and Elizabeth Barrett-Browning did not behave according to the
standards which were to become emblematic of the Victorian age : George Eliot, a non-conformist in religion and in
morals, lived with G.H. Lewes, whom the laws and morals of the time forbade to divorce his wife: she insisted on
being called “ Mrs. Lewes ” (Haight 1968 : 229), and when he died, she took another companion much younger than
herself. Elizabeth Barrett eloped with Robert Browning − creating scandal in London at the time. Whatever we may
think of the division of the sexes, of the possibly bisexual origin and inner nature of man, and of the current distinction
of sex and gender, it seems no artifact to have a comparative study of their language. This has often been attempted in a
broad perspective by some supporters of the feminist movement, but here we are concerned with a question which was
raised on several occasions and often in connection with sound change : what is the role of women in linguistic
evolution ? In the domain of sound changes, Herman’s study following Gauchat’s at Charmey, in French-speaking
Switzerland, gave evidence that when active change is in progress women are clearly ahead of men ; a fact which more
recent surveys tend to confirm (Labov 1994, p.72,156; Tagliamonte 1998). Luckily, the corpus chosen offered quite a
large amount of women’s contributions (see II.1), fairly evenly distributed along the years so that the diachronic
profiles can be compared.
I.3.4.b. Intimacy : common sense suggests that the degree of intimacy with the addressee has some influence on the
style and, eventually, on the grammar of the letter. Intimacy, familiarity, spontaneity are near synonyms for the
personal relationship a letter implies. The first has been retained because it is less circular : it does not refer to style but
to the microsociology of the circle of family, friends and more distant epistolary connections of a man or a woman.
This means that the question is largely a subject for biographers, who will sometimes hesitate to say whether a given
person belongs to the set of intimate or less intimate correspondents. The degrees could be multiplied : anyone among
us has an opinion about it, and might find it difficult to say for some of her or his friends which are more intimate than
35
This to recall Paul Valéry's description of poetry as dance and prose as walking: in writing current prose, little
attention is paid to the words themselves; it is the message that counts.
24
others. Many will certainly agree that some friends can be more intimate than even close family, and the wider the
circle the more difficult it is to draw the concentric limits of intimacy.
Then, it is a constant fact that intimacy varies in the course of time : close friendships and even family ties are loosened
and are even disrupted, while others develop. The diachrony of love and friendship is not fixed : there are stable
attachments, there are also variations in the minds and hearts of both parties. People who read biographies and
collections of letters become increasingly aware of such movements. That Coleridge was a changeable person is
notorious. Carlyle, on the other hand, was all his life a faithful brother − while he himself confessed, after Jane died
and he read her letters to publish them, that he had not always behaved towards his wife as he should have. It is not
entirely possible to avoid the circularity alluded to above : it is largely by reading the letters that biographers form an
idea of the feelings of the writer. At a purely formal level −not to be trusted absolutely − we can rely on expressions of
friendship or affection, as opposed to the conventional phrases at the beginning or the conclusion of a letter. In that
respect, English letter-writing gives less freedom than, for example, the French practice of original conclusions, with
Voltaire as a typical case. A letter beginning with “ My Lord ” and concluding with “ Your Lordship’s faithful and
obedient servant ” is not an intimate letter like one beginning with “ Dear Alick ” (Carlyle), or “ dear Barbara ” (Eliot) :
yet, Wordsworth, although not indulging in familiarity with him, had become a friend of Lord Lonsdale and was a
friendly adviser to Sir George Beaumont, another aristocrat ; Thackeray, not a member of the nobility, but no doubt a
“ gigman ” − to use Carlyle’s sarcastic epithet − enjoyed sufficient freedom with fashionable ladies like Lady
Castlereagh to address them as friends. The study of introductory or concluding phrases could be carried further for a
comparative study of the relation between form and feeling, of the degrees of reserve and warmth. To conclude on this
delicate point, we will say that the final decision results from a confrontation between the formal features found in the
letters, the general impression they give and biographical data : this means that we have, as often in biological and
human matters, fuzzy sets.
Since we are aiming at general and solid results, it has been found sufficient to consider three degrees of intimacy : (1)
close, (3) distant, and (2) in-between. In the usual sense of the term, there are no business letters in the collections.
Yet, some are not far from it. The most common case is when, for example, at least for part of a letter addressed to a
publisher, money matters are raised : this even happens when George Eliot writes to her old publisher and friend John
Blackwood. When Wordsworth was campaigning for the protection of writers’s rights, he wrote many letters to
Sargeant Balfour, M.P. or even to the Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel, which can be considered as business letters, even
when he takes the opportunity to ask for personal news : such letters have not been eliminated as a rule, but they are
included in class 3 (more distant). At the intimate end of the scale, we find the family circle. One might object to
putting together the type of intimacy between a boy addressing his mother (John Ruskin when he was still a boy or in
College), or his father (Macaulay), a grown-up man (Carlyle) writing regularly to his mother or his brothers, and loveletters (those, published in a separate volume, of the Brownings), letters from London or from abroad to the family at
home (Maria Edgeworth, Wordsworth, Dickens, Thackeray, etc.) or to brothers, sisters or close friends (Jane Austen,
Carlyle, Macaulay, etc.). Still, from the point of view we are adopting here, they share the same freedom of style,
casual, newsy, little concerned with form except in its transparency to the feelings, even when it is careful as befits a
good writer.
For some of the letter-writers, it has not been found useful to have separate degrees : Mary Wordsworth’s letters are
addressed to family and close friends only, Jane Austen’s almost entirely to her sister Cassandra, and Keats’s to
brothers and friends, in the same tone and erratic spelling. In other cases, there was not enough biographical
information available for a scale of distance : except when the content and form of the letter made it clear that it was
not addressed to an intimate or a friend, degree 2 was then taken as the neutral class of friendly interchange. When
degrees have been established, a list of the correspondents, for degrees 1 and 2 mostly, is given in the ANNEX.
Needless to say it could not be complete : only those who were fairly regular addressees have been noted ; nor could it
be very strict. As said above, a connection beginning in formal terms sometimes became more and more intimate (e.g.
Elma Stuart in the case of G. Eliot) so that all letters to the same person were not always in the same category : but then
the moment when the nature of the relation changes is largely subjective, since it is a gradual phenomenon. The lists
are largely indicative, and can be confronted with available biographical information.
25
CHAPTER TWO
THE CORPUS
II.1.
Size and contents
The corpus of the survey consists of published private letters of 22 people born between the last decades of the 18th
century (1767 : Maria Edgeworth), and 1819 (John Ruskin), most of them famous writers of the Romantic Age. The
letters were written between 1780 and 1880, approximately, individual extant contributions showing much variation
over the years, as could be expected. In a few cases (Scott, Southey, Browning) parts of the collections published at
the time were not surveyed. Other letter-writers might also have been included, but as it is, the corpus is substantial :
nearly 10 million words, or in other terms, some 30,000 pages or 70 sizeable volumes. Special attention was given
to the contribution of women : it is only about half that of men in terms of text-length, but this is more than could
have been expected, and, since they use the progressive more than men do, on the total of nearly 22,000 occurrences
of the progressive, their share is about 8,000, more than two thirds of the contribution of men. A list of the writers is
given in the ANNEX, as well as the bibliography of the collections.
The choice of this corpus was not a matter of mere chance or intuition. A comprehensive survey of early and middle
nineteenth century English progressives had been made for a doctoral dissertation (Arnaud 1973). The aim then was
not a quantitative computation, but it soon became evident that the form was far from evenly distributed in the
variety of texts available. Poetry left aside as one type of discourse most distant from ordinary verbal intercourse, it
was clear that the frequency varied along some sort of formality scale. The point had already been noted by others,
Ota 1963 especially, for contemporary American English, Mossé 1938 more generally. So that if one wanted to find
substance for a study relying on attested sentences, it was wiser to concentrate on the documents where density was
greatest. The historical linguist cannot rely on elicitations and his own intuitions, even when he has become familiar
with the period’s ways, must be followed with diffidence.36 It soon became clear that it needed less extensive reading
to find progressives in Punch than in The Annual Register, in lively novels and in their dialogues than in
philosophical or historical essays, and in everyday correspondence than in political speeches in the House of
Commons37. Even the published scripts of murder trials ( The Trial of William Palmer, 1856, is a good example :
see Knott 1952), which seem close to ordinary speech when witnesses from various social classes are crossquestioned, must be considered with precaution : the Assizes is not a place where people speak without control, and
the minutes were written by clerks.
Definitely, the location for a reasonable density of progressives and the most relaxed type of discourse is the large
corpus of private letters kept and collected by the devotees of eminent men and women of the time 38.
36
Is a non-native even less qualified ? This is an old dispute among ethnologists. He is probably less prone than a
native speaker to identify the language of the past with that of the present (see above I,1): a French person cannot
easily conceive that contemporaries of Flaubert, apart from the novelist himself, did not use the "imparfait" as we do
now, an English reader feels quite at home in Dickens's or Mrs Gaskell's novels; but if we exchange books, perhaps
the non-native will be less easily deceived.
37
Hansard's transcriptions seem fairly reliable, but reported speech is their rule, and MP's address a very special
audience.
38
M.Rydén and S. Brorström 1987, in their extensive survey of the be/have variation in the 18th and 19th century,
have also concentrated on private letters; and on comedies, too. It might be worthwhile to survey some 19th century
comedies, but there seems to be some artificiality in their style. If a survey of dialogue in novels, which was
attempted in Arnaud 1973 and was also suggested by Strang 1982, was not so time-consuming, it would provide a
better sample of everyday conversation than comedies. There is always some literary distortion, however. In recent
years, explorations of the sociolinguistic variables have been undertaken, and are still continuing. The work of the
Helsinki school is considerable in this respect (see e.g. Nevalainen, Raumolin-Brunberg 1996). However, much of
what has been done applies to Early English, i.e. before that golden age of private correspondence considered here,
which means a different methodological approach: for example, there are occasions when letters by educated ladies
follow a conventional pattern. This is no longer the case after 1800. The conclusion should be that there is no
"degree zero" of common speech at any time, and that each "genre" deserves to be studied in its own right, with due
26
No doubt manuscript letters from “ ordinary people ” could be found in private or public records : they would seem
more authentic witnesses of every man’s or woman’s everyday language. Apart from the disproportionate effort it
would require to gather a sufficient amount of material, this is certainly a fallacy. Either the writers were really
literate people and the difference between their letters and those studied here would be insignificant, especially
concerning a point of grammar not fully conscious, or they were half-literate, and then hypercorrection comes into
play : the letters of the joiner John Overs to Dickens ( Smith 1974 ) are typical in this respect (see I.3.4.). Another
danger might be that, for some at least, an artificial prose inspired by school-teaching could prevail − young ladies
were taught letter-writing manners by teachers or governesses. When you read George Eliot’s early letters to her old
affectionate evangelical schoolmistress, Miss Maria Lewis, you are aware of that risk39. There is no need to
apologize, then, for the choice of letter-writers who were writers at the same time : accessibility is not the only
reason for the choice ; these good writers write ordinary letters most of the time, not monuments of literature. To
conclude on this point, we may also recall that the ordinary man is an abstraction : no one exactly fits the model, no
Englishman was really John Bull. In sociolinguistic terms, statistical survey of a comprehensive range of speakerwriters is just an inevitable way of smoothing individual idiolects to have a reliable picture of community speech.
As to the actual choice of the letter-writers, university library shelves display a long array of volumes of letters from
eminent people of the period. The idea was to gather as representative a selection as possible, arranged in
chronological order with the best possible contribution of women and it does not claim to be more than a sample of
what is already a sample of what was the correspondence of the time.
Not all collections of letters have been edited as we would like to find them. There has been steady progress in this
respect, and the ongoing publication of the Carlyles’ or of Dickens’s letters are a model of what ought to be done.
Many older selections were prepared by family or friends who had their views about what was good, worthless or
inappropriate. Usually, they aim at biographers and literary critics, seldom if at all do they think that the text can
also be precious for linguists 40. Modern editors record everything, even when they find the handwriting illegible :
they simply insert a note to help the reader. They must be congratulated for it. It does not matter very much to us
when letters have been omitted or emended for various moral reasons, although it matters a little ; but it seems that in
some cases, letters or paragraphs have been suppressed simply because the subjet-matter seemed uninteresting while
it is precisely where we could find the informal style we are looking for. It is also important that all forms should be
kept without emendations or corrections. John Keats’s bad grammar and spelling is well-known : fortunately his
letters have been published, apparently, as they were written. But we cannot always be confident that it was so for
others, especially when they were printed in the 19th Century, so that selections which could have been interesting
have had to be left aside : Disraeli’s letters for example, because they are scattered and emended extracts in a
biographical narrative ; Mary Shelley’s, Landor’s, Clough’s were discarded after inspection, etc. We are fortunate
that there is a fair amount of women’s letters. Discontinuous as they are, those of Maria Edgeworth have been
included for that reason and for their early date. The Brownings’letters are scattered in several volumes and sorting
them was not easy : Robert’s corpus is limited and not very instructive, though he lived till old age. Solid and
substantial collections are of course the best, not only because they offer a rich harvest, but also because they allow
us to outline the linguistic trajectory of the individual person. George Eliot’s letters, magnificently published by
Gordon S. Haight, one of the first to do such work, gave a starting point (Arnaud 1980, 1982) : covering all her adult
life with reasonable regularity. But we must be grateful to the people who kept and those who published the
extensive collections which form the major part of our corpus : letters were then considered precious, even before
their writers became famous. What will be preserved of our telephone conversations ?
consideration of the sociolinguistics of the times as the Helsinki researchers rightly emphasized. Explorations into
other "genres", comedies for example, can give interesting insights, but on the whole they seem more remote from
everyday speech.
39
The fairly abundant literature of what Violette Desclaire 1973 calls "open letters", that is letters addressed to the
public, or to a definite public, and often found in magazines, is not what we are looking for, and seems to have been
a practice of the previous century, no longer in favour after 1800; even Maria Edgeworth's letters from England are
family letters.
40
When Wordsworth, who advised his son to drop his Northern pronunciation when he became a vicar in East
Anglia, forgets his spelling and writes nought for note, this may be a hint at what that Northern pronunciation was.
27
II.2.
Sampling
The sample lends itself to qualitative as well as quantitative studies. Nothing is anonymous: our letter-writers are
something like the literary jet-set of the time.41
This means that the selection cannot be said to be a statistical random sample in the technical sense of the term.
Population would be a more appropriate term, though it is only a fragment of the overall population. As stated
above, this was a deliberate choice, meant to provide maximum information, since it covers practically all the
available letters of the authors. It does not preclude further statistical treatment.
The question still remains : according to what laws governing the use of language in a given community could
sampling be done ? Is every person to be given the same weight as in pre-election surveys ? We know that some
people act as leaders in language change, and that the study of diffusion can benefit by consideration of the networks
of social relations (Cf. Milroy 1987 ; Labov 2001), but to unravel them in communities long extinct and extend to
written texts what can be valid for oral practice would be a very long task indeed. The only point where something
like quota sampling will be found here is the substantial contribution of women letter-writers. Even if we submit to
the dictate that language is not a statistical concept, nor even immanent in a corpus, quantitative analysis of a
sizeable corpus is at least one of the ways of assessing some essential phenomena, especially in the domain of
change. To what extent can the observations be valid for the community at large is, theoretically, impossible to
demonstrate. In practice, however, that is what corpus-oriented linguists in search of plausible trends always imply.
Some other questions cannot be evaded. Quota sampling was mentioned in the case of women versus men, but what
about age-groups, generations ? When we put together all the letters written during a given period, we do not
separate the younger from the older people : this could possibly be done on the basis of the data provided. It can be
another occasion for establishing the difficult relationship between apparent-time and real-time surveys (Labov
1994). The attempted comparison (see below III.1.3.) for the period 1835-40 is indicative in this respect. It seems
reasonable to guess that, if only people of the same generation were considered − thus reducing considerably the size
of the data − there would be more stability within each group, and a greater gap between groups. Even when people
follow the general trend, when they grow old they are sometimes left behind : this question of community change
and generational change will be considered in section III.1.3.
As was to be expected, the contributions in terms of length of text are variable not only from person to person but for
a given individual according to life-circumstances. People write more letters, and longer, when they are away from
home : Maria Edgeworth and Wordsworth wrote when they were in London, and many letters were sent from
abroad, Macaulay’s from India, George Eliot’s on her tours on the Continent, Ruskin’s when he was painting in
Italy, Dickens’s and Thackeray’s from America, etc. This is especially true for letters written to near relatives. Then
we have what can be seen as business letters : those addressed to publishers, for example, and the many letters
Wordsworth sent to Lord Lonsdale or his son Lord Lowther when he was canvassing for their election, etc. They
have been included, in consideration of the fact that publishers, for example, had usually become friends, with ups
and downs perhaps, but no more than with other friends : George Eliot’s friendship with John Blackwood − not to
speak of John Chapman, with whom she once lived − is a good example of long-standing intimacy. When
interpreting the results, this can be taken into account, as well as the cooling of regular friendships— for example, on
the occasion of the affair of the Garrick Club,in 1858, between Thackeray and Dickens, with their common friends
Yates and Forster involved in the storm —; or even the vicissitudes of family relationships — something happened
between Mrs Gaskell and Marianne in 1858, and Macaulay was obviously disturbed when his dear sister Hannah
married in 1835 : see III.1.4.b.
A thoroughly significant search for such clues would be doing biography in detail : we have to be satisfied here with
very general lines, and mere hints.
41
It could be interesting to have linguistic data from the jet-set, or even royalty. Incidentally, the published letters of
Queen Victoria, even those to her favourite daughter the Princess Royal (Dearest child, 1858-1861) display a very
small quota of progressives: the density, evaluated on a corpus of 22,000 words only, is 56; none of our letterwriters shows so small a figure. Apparently, "The Queen was not amused" − to quote one of her favourite
ejaculations − with the progressive form, perhaps incongruous in her environment.
28
As could be expected, the corpus is not evenly distributed : the beginning and end periods or decades are less
substantial than the central ones : this is due, except in a few cases (Scott, Southey) either to the absence of letters or
to incomplete publication at the time of the survey (Carlyles, Dickens). It could be corrected for the last decade by
surveying new collections of letters. For the early years, it does not seem that much more can be found, especially in
women’s correspondence. Some attempts have been made to compensate for this unevenness, by adding periods or
decades, or by computing equivalents “ lots ” in terms of word number : they did not bring significant
improvements, so that they are not presented here. However, the letters written before 1800 have been included in
the first “ decade ”, and the last “ decade ” covers the period 1865-1880, in order to enrich the data for better
approximation.
II.3.
Community grammars and idiolects
So much for the quantitative aspect. In terms of sociolinguistic significance, other questions arise. Chomsky’s
homogeneous community is, he owned it, an artifact. Since we are attempting a study of Saussurean parole, a word
must be said about the main characteristics of each writer, in terms of naturalness and what we call spontaneity,
above all. The reading of that prose from people who have a certain image can provoke surprise. One would expect
Wordsworth’s and Carlyle’s style to be somewhat cramped : it is not so. Wordsworth lamented, like Cicero, the
disruption of society − he predicted the fall of England at the time when she was becoming the leading world-power
− but he did so in the familiar vein, with few oratorical effects. Carlyle wrote in plain terms even at the time when
he was translating Goethe or writing Sartor Resartus in a style famous for its ruggedness : how could he have
written otherwise when he was writing to his mother, an elderly or old peasant woman smoking her pipe by her
Scottish fireside, or to his farmer brothers, or even to his beloved and ill-treated Jeannie, his wife ? George Eliot has
been said to be sesquipedalian : what strikes most when you read her letters, especially in the later years, is her everrecurring complaints. She confesses that, when not too well, she is “ writing on her knees ” : how can one be stilted
in such a posture ? The champion of cursiveness is certainly Mrs Gaskell : always busy, always in high spirits it
seems, she writes with a lively style. Conversely, Macaulay, often writing from the House of Commons, tends to
transfer to some of his letters, where we find occasional lengthy dissertations, some of the tone of his Parliamentary
eloquence : but not so much as one might expect. As to Scott, taking leave at times of the boring speeches in Court,
where he was a Justice (Sheriff-Depute, or Shirra, to use the Scottish word he loved), he seems to enjoy the
relaxation he is indulging in. With Dickens and Thackeray, there is some variety. The latter’s numerous brief notes
(there was no telephone at the time to suggest or cancel an appointement) have been discarded. At times their letters
make one think of their novels, glimpses of humorous stories, portraits, etc. but seldom to the point of being
elaborate literary pieces. Jane Welsh-Carlyle is a different case. She is sometimes said to be the British Madame de
Sévigné, but whereas it is well-known that the latter wrote for an audience of appreciative people, played the fine
writer, carefully calculating her effects, Jane Carlyle is a newsy and marvellous letter-writer simply because it was in
her nature. So is it with Jane Austen, who was perhaps, however, one of the first among moderns to take letterwriting as a possible genre − apart from epistolary novels, of course. Yet her simplicity never seems affected.
Indeed, letter-writing can be seen as a literary genre. Ordinary conversation could be one as well : Coleridge is said
to have been a brilliant talker ; Scott was one too, in a different manner ; we cannot imagine Wordsworth or Carlyle
in the same role. Everyone to his own style, this is all we can say. Is there a “ degree zero ” of linguistic
expression ? The question remains open, and the answer is probably negative, but, so far as grammar (or
pronunciation) is concerned, we must keep to Labov’s rule : “ least controlled most regular ”. Letter-writing answers
the requirement in the best possible way.
This study is not biography nor literary history or criticism : for a more accurate description, the reader should refer
to biographies or to the various commentaries in the collections of letters. It may be helpful, however, to give a short
summary of each individual author’s “ epistolary career ”, if we can risk the expression. It stresses also one of the
problems we are facing in micro-diachronic analysis : the passing of time implies that everything is moving. A few
letters from early youth have been preserved : they are always addressed to parents. Not only those of Ruskin, a
much-petted child, but also those of Coleridge − very few − of Macaulay, of Thackeray. Carlyle, as already
mentioned, kept faithfully writing long letters to his mother as long as she lived. Then, we have letters to friends at
the passionate time of adolescence. Then come love letters : there is a volume of them by the Brownings, but there
are also some instances of letters addressed by Scott to his future wife, Miss Carpenter, and of Thomas and Jane
Carlyle − were they also love letters in their married life, when one of the couple was on a journey ? Certainly, at
least in a way. Even Dickens wrote lovingly to Kate, from whom he was later to become estranged, as to an even
29
greater degree was Thackeray whose wife Isabella had to be sent to an asylum. Then we have all the variations of
maturity and middle-age, and, later, the vicissitudes of life mean that some correspondents disappeared, sometimes
simply because they had died.
The following remarks are presented in the chronological order of the letter-writers.
Maria Edgeworth’s main body of letters were written when she left Ireland, her usual abode, to visit friends −
personal, political, literary − in the fashionable world of England. We have every reason to think that, while she
knew the English spoken in her Celtic surroundings42, even if she possibly could not speak it as well as her friend
Walter Scott spoke Scots (Tulloch, 1980), this was not the language she was inclined to write, even to family or
friends. There is every reason to suggest that she even kept as much away from it as possible. So that Anglo-Irish
influence can hardly be suspected in her grammar.
Then we find the group of the Lake Poets, as they have been called.
Coleridge was born in Devon, and never lost his local accent. His letters seem to be as erratic as his life, so that it is
difficult to have significant guidelines, even to locate the various degrees of intimacy with his correspondents, since
he was so elusive and changeable.
Robert Southey was born in Bristol. He spent some time in Portugal, and sent many letters from there. But he lived
in the Lake District for years, to end his life there, in seclusion and dotage.
The others (to whom we have added Sara Hutchinson, since she really belongs there) are a more homogeneous
group : people really from the mountains of Cumberland and Westmoreland, and certainly affected by the language
spoken there. However, in their writing, they seem to adhere to a fairly controlled Johnsonian English.
Unconsciously, they may have carried into it some grammatical features more widespread in the North, the
progressive among them. Dorothy Wordsworth became a dotard at a comparatively early age (before 50). Before
that time, she does not seem to write very differently from her brother, except that she spoke more willingly of
children and domestic events.
This is even more perceptible in Mary Wordsworth’s letters, almost all sent to family or close friends, and speaking
usually of family matters. Their companion Sara Hutchinson, Mary’s sister, once wooed by Coleridge as his muse
“ Asra ”, writes about everyday topics : for the Wordsworth circle, this inevitably includes ongoing literary
activities. Coleridge himself, a notoriously versatile man and poet, also usually writes the ordinary news of an
extraordinary mind, visionary, often full of passionate ejaculations : he is a borderline case of what we call familiar
letter-writing.
Very different are Robert Southey’s letters : a literary man and historian, once a close friend of Coleridge, he writes
about his works and comments on contemporary events, but there are few pages not written in the usual style of
friendly news.
No significant difference is perceptible in the language of all these writers, still formed in the eighteenth century
tradition of correctness, whether they lived in the North, or the South, or even in Scotland or Ireland. There was
some friendly correspondence between Scott and Maria Edgeworth or Wordsworth, both of whom visited him in
Scotland. So far as conscious wording is concerned, and since some instances of the progressive may have been
already stigmatized as celticisms, as they will certainly be later (Cf. Bain 1863), up to a point they must have resisted
the Northern or Celtic influence, in the name of good English.
Between that early group and Carlyle or Macaulay there seems to be a gap. The former had lived the times of the
French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars, and the latter were really men of the new age. Between Carlyle and
Scott there is also a difference of social class : Scott, a lawyer in Edinburgh, had high connections, such as the Duke
and Duchess of Buccleuch, and then King George IV himself − he was in charge of his reception in Scotland − and
Queen Caroline, whom he visited in Kensington. The simplicity of his epistolary style is that of a well-born
gentleman who was to become the Knight of Abbottsford. Carlyle was a son of a Scottish mason, and most of his
family were still farmers, with the exception of his brother Jack, a regular correspondent, who became a doctor. He
lived in Scotland for the first forty years of his life, and his letters, often addressed to his mother, are full of questions
on the usual occupations and interests of people living in villages : ploughing and harvesting, buying and selling
42
Strang 1982 noted the exceptional frequency of the progressive in Castle Rackrent: although my own figure (360)
based on the whole book is lower than hers (500), it remains very high, and is obviously due to the narrator's being
an Irish steward.
30
horses, drinking, having love-affairs and illnesses. No hint of gentility in all that : he was a blunt man, later to abhor
what he called “ gigmanism ”, the worldly refinement of London gentlefolks his friend Thackeray was so fond of.
Beautifully edited by C.R. Sanders and K.J. Fielding, et al.( Duke-Edinburgh Edition), his letters are an exceptional
testimony. At the same time, largely due to his Scottish origin, and to his personality, he is a little apart from the
community we are exploring.
Macaulay, in spite of his connections with Scotland, is a very different letter-writer. His life was centered on
Parliamentary life and the writing of historical essays. There are two sides to his correspondence. Addressed to his
friends, many letters are about literary matters and are sometimes stodgy, with references to the classics − this is not
uncommon, especially with young university men of the time ; but there is a large number of letters to his sisters
(Hannah and Margaret) where he is more relaxed in his style as well as in his humour. From India, where he spent
many years, he had the satisfaction of earning a lot of money but the litany of his preparations for return tell many
correspondents how glad he was to see England again.
Carlyle and Macaulay are a sort of transition before we find the great writers we have called “ the later Romantics ”,
a practical label which literary historians might not approve. An important historical event must be recalled : the
introduction of the Penny Post in 1840. Whereas Wordsworth, a man of small means − he wrote many letters
begging employment for his son − often asked Lord Lonsdale to frank his letters, whereas Carlyle, to save postage,
kept a system of signals with his family in Mainhill by scoring lines on newspapers, the Penny Post opened new
perspectives and the early Victorians became champions of letter-writing. People seem to have been seized with a
frenzy of correspondence.
Let’s just note at this point that the overall content and manner of that correspondence is fairly homogeneous. The
letters vary in length according to needs. Editors have published short notes carried by messengers in London, for
example, which we have not included in the count (especially in the case of Thackeray). The longest letters are
usually those sent from abroad, from the Continent, or, by Dickens and Thackeray from America.
The rythm of existence was accelerating : what with writing books, delivering lectures, travelling abroad, receiving
visitors, these early Victorian celebrities sometimes managed to write very long letters. Similarly, in France, George
Sand, who fascinated some of them (women like E.Barrett-Browning and, of course, George Eliot), an
extraordinarily active woman, found the time, often in the night,to write so many letters that their publication by
Georges Lubin consists of 27 thick volumes. No one among the English writers was as prolific as she was, but many
have left a good number of letters : nearly 1600, for example, in Thackeray’s case.
The letters of John Ruskin are addressed to his parents, including two collections sent from Italy in 1845 and 185152, and this means a certain homogeneity in subject matter and tone.
II.4.
Identifying the progressive
Grammars often refer to expressions that might be confused with “ true ” progressives. Thus it seems appropriate to
list briefly some of these, most of them quoted from the letters. Usually, the context was sufficiently clear to resolve
the ambiguity. The few dubious cases remaining were omitted from the count.
a. Adjectives :
Some attributive -ing adjectives of temporary scope, analogous to adjectives such as busy (working), asleep
(sleeping) or ill (suffering), can be found in predicative position and thus confused with progressives, whose
adjectival force is obvious Even smiling, for example, can be ambiguous in some contexts, such as : it [thecottage ]
is smiling in sunset (Thackeray, Pendennis). Also : Mary has been a little peeking I believe (Thackeray 1842 ). But
in : An infant is almost always sleeping (Coleridge, 1898 ), we have a verb-form. Sometimes, as in the case of
outstanding, forthcoming, the absence of a regular verb (*outstand, *forthcome) excludes the progressive label, but
what about : New men, Mr. Harding, ... are now forthcoming in the church (Trollope, Barchester Towers) ? With
owing, the context is necessary. Other ambiguous cases include : calculating, complaining, consenting, deserving,
existing, forbearing, stirring, and worrying. We also encounter prepositional expressions such as : they are facts
which ... are well deserving of attention. In : are you, or is Dr. Mitford, understanding of these things ? (BarrettBrowning to Miss Mitford, 1837 ;15) the preposition confirms the adjectival status (*are you understanding this ?).
But at the time, there were still instances of expressions where of follows a progressive, especially in popular or
dialectal use (observed in Dickensian characters for example) : they are not present in this corpus.
31
b. Gerundial forms :
In : would it be asking too great a favour to beg you... ? the expression is clearly a nominal one ; but in : It would
however I fear be outraging the character of antiquary to restore this noble feature (Scott, 1830 ), there may be a
little room for hesitation, although it refers to an infinitive. Very few cases are uncertain, however.
c. Word-order :
Insertion of adverbials between be and -ing is sometimes puzzling : Miss Q. was out riding (Mary Wordsworth,
1839 ) ; while I was in town house hunting (Edgeworth, 1822 ) ; We have been here praying to have the spring put
off (Edgeworth, 1898 ) ; and even : I was, a few days after that order reached us, in a rick-yard, looking at the ricks
(Cobbett) ; we find it hard to decide if these are real progressives : grammarians sometimes speak of “ dangling
participles ”. They were not included, nor such expressions as: I am very near agreeing with Hazlitt that
Shakespeare is enough for us (Keats, R, 1817 ), or : that father of mine is “ in trouble again ”. How long he is,
growing up to be a man (Dickens, P, 1842 ).
d. Near equivalents.
The best known is : in the act of, as in: I am just in the act of getting done with that thrice wearisome Legendre
(Carlyle, 1821 ) ; we also find: I have been engaged in travelling backwards and forwards to Selkirkshire (Scott,
1804 ). Contrast these examples with in the habit of as in: I am in the habit of taking my papers to Dilke (Keats,
1818 ).
Some set-phrases including -ing forms, were very popular at the time ; some of them are still in use. It was ringing
ten, striking four, he is rising five (years of age) : [of a horse] or I am going in seventeen, can be seen as
progressives, but not : it was locking up (time). Nor can : In two minutes the vessel will be burning hot (Coleridge,
1799 ) ; I was weeping glad (Coleridge, 1824 ), easily be considered as true progressives. An interesting case is that
of double progressives such as : I have been sitting thinking of it these 10 minutes (Thackeray, 1849 ) which was
counted as two progressive forms. In the careless style of some letters, the well-formedness of a sentence is difficult
to judge, as in How sick and sleepless I was lying in bed, when I was told that you were come (Macaulay, 1821 ) : he
was not yet, at 21, the eloquent M.P. and historian he later became.
As a last word, consider going to, which has been completely grammaticalized in Present Day English. The
grammaticalization was not really complete in Early Modern English, where we sometimes find it in competition
with coming to. In rare cases, it is impossible to say whether, for example, The President has sent to me twice, and I
am going to see him to-morrow (Dickens, 1864 ) is metaphorically referring to an arrrangement (i.e. a new way of
stating what was earlier expressed as I am to see the President to-morrow) or to actual movement.
II.5.
Data collection.
Surveying such a huge collection took a long time, and the methods had to be perfected. One of the problems is the
lack of homogeneity of the collections, in material form. Volumes vary in size and in print, letters are sometimes
numbered, sometimes not, only dated when possible. There are supplements, footnotes contribute to variations in the
length of pages of text. This is reflected in the system of references used in the bibliography of the letter-writers.
Since the frequency (density here) is calculated on 100 000 words, the way words are counted is important:
computers deal with that problem now, never entirely satisfactorily. It would take volumes to define what a word is .
I have relied on the common-sense notion of graphic items between spaces (compound words making one unit, as
well as abbreviations or figures.). Then random sampling must be attempted, using samples not too long: in this
study, the unit was ten times ten complete lines randomly selected in a given book, (by sytematic sampling, to make
things easier: i.e. given two random numbers (odd and even, to equalize chances) the pages were selected at a 10
page interval over the whole volume), so that the average number of words per line could be calculated, then to be
applied to the whole volume, or volumes. Then, the number of lines for the whole volume was counted as strictly as
32
possible, eliminating pictures, blanks, heads of chapters, etc. At present, the computer certainly allows more
precision, provided it is duly fed.43
To conclude, let’s stress again that the study, largely because it is exploratory, relies on a conception of the use of
language allowing for some fuzziness in everyday language, even in the case of very clever writers. This lack of
rigidity so uncongenial to prescriptivists as well as to formal linguists is probably one of the conditions for language
change, in a dialectics of understanding/misunderstanding, functionality/disfunctionality. On this point, often
underlined by Labov − cf. for example Labov 1994 : 11 : “ Historical linguistics can then be thought of as the art of
making the best use of bad data ” ; see also Arnaud 1983.
43
The trouble with some estimates (Mossé's 1938, for instance) is that they don't tell us how the count was made,
and I found it sometimes differed significantly from my own. This is why I have found it necessary to give some
precisions, without writing a methodological treatise.
33
CHAPTER THREE
RESULTS
III.1.
Density
III.1.1. Overall increase :
The first measure of the development for a period of nearly a century between the extreme dates, is that of the
density of progressives in the text (frequency, number of occurrences per 100 000 words).44 It was originally
computed by five-year periods, but the general trend is more clearly displayed by “ decades ” in Figure 1, where
data for the years before 1800 and for 1865-80 respectively − hence not strictly decades − have been fused.
However, since the size of the corpus over the years displays a bell-shaped curve, the validity of the graph can be
questioned, in the absence of statistical tests (see above I.1). This is why another method has also been used. It
consists of dividing the data (words and PF’s) into “ lots ” of equivalent size, arranged in chronological order. This
implies a different weighting of people and dates, thus compensating for one of the possibilities of bias, but the even
spacing of the successive periods is not preserved and we have only ordinal scaling (Figure 3). We can see that not
only has the density increased from approximately 140 in the first decade of the century to reach a peak of some 350
by the 1870s, but the increase is regular over the years. What had been suspected on the basis of test counts is
verified with a much larger corpus. Besides this overall estimate and anticipating our study of their possible role, the
curve for women shown in Figure 2 displays an increase parallel to that of men.
III.1.2. The two romantic generations :
Using the word generation in a wide sense, a chronological grouping of the writers has been found useful, evaluating
the process, this time discontinuously, by putting together the entire life-production of each age-group. It is a
different approach, in that it does not account for possible evolution in a writer’s lifetime : individual trajectories
will be studied below III.1.4.b. We do not take it for granted that people do not alter their language manners in the
course of their lives, any more than other manners : see below III.1.3.
Two generations have been distinguished, with nearly equal contribution in terms of text-length (around 3 600 000
words). The number of men and women in the two groups is equivalent though their contributions are not : women
are under-represented.
44
This gives numbers below 400, of which the last figure can usually be neglected.. Mossé 1938: I, 65; II, 30,n.;
271 suggested it; Arnaud 1973 followed suit, as well as Scheffer 1975: 78, independently (he calls it the Mcoefficient). Scheffer also discusses its validity, and suggests another measurement, proposed by Nickel 1966, which
he calls the K-coefficient obtained by "dividing the number of progressives in a text by the total number of all verbal
forms less those of which it is ascertained that they cannot possibly be replaced by a progressive, and multiplying by
10 000 to get a workable coefficient".
This last solution is ideally better than the one I have chosen. Yet it meets with two serious objections: 1. It is
definitely difficult, on the one hand, to ascertain which verbal forms cannot be replaced by a progressive especially
in a variety of often long non-contemporary texts; this would usually be begging the question. 2. Except if it were
limited to part of the verb system (one tense-form, for example), it would render the task really gigantic. 3. It implies
a binary view of progressive v. non-progressive forms, which is not entirely legitimate (see I.2). 4. This does not
mean that binary studies are valueless. In order to overcome this considerable handicap, Arnaud 1973 used a
separate count of non-progressive verb forms in samples of texts to compare their density with that of progressives in
other samples of the same text. The comparative distribution of 1000 non-progressives and 1000 progressives gave a
measure (Q) of the incidence of the latter. Yet what could be undertaken for a comparatively limited survey was out
of the question for a much more extensive one. On this point see Binary glimpses in the ANNEX.
34
Group A : THE EARLY ROMANTICS :
Maria EDGEWORTH, Jane AUSTEN, Samuel Taylor COLERIDGE, the WORDSWORTH circle (William, Mary
and Sara HUTCHINSON, but excepting Dorothy WORDSWORTH to keep the two groups of equal size), Walter
SCOTT, and John KEATS. John RUSKIN’s parents have also been included, with a small contribution.
This is the generation of Napoleon Bonaparte and Wellington, both born in 1769, and contemporaries of Maria
Edgeworth, of Walter Scott and of the Lake poets. The median of their letter-writing production is situated around
1810-15.
Group B : THE LATER ROMANTICS :
Thomas Babington MACAULAY, Elizabeth BARRETT-BROWNING, Charles DICKENS, George ELIOT,
Elizabeth GASKELL, William Makepeace THACKERAY, Jane WELSH-CARLYLE, John RUSKIN. CARLYLE
has been excluded for the same reason as Dorothy Wordsworth above, and because he is in a sense an outsider, due
to his Scottish background. The small and atypical contribution of ROBERT BROWNING has also been left out.
This is the generation of Disraeli (born in 1804), in a wide sense, since G. Eliot and Ruskin, the youngest, were born
in 1819. The median of their production is 1850, that is 35 years later than for group A.
Table 1 gives the figures, which speak for themselves :
TABLE 1
Density for two generations
Group A : 157
Group B : 313
So, in the space of 35 years or so, the figure is doubled.
III.1.3. Apparent-time :
The main purpose of the study is an evaluation “ in real time ”. “ Apparent-time ” surveys, such as Gauchat’s
pioneering work of 1905 at Charmey in Switzerland, compare the output of different generations at a given moment.
They have often been just a substitute for the appreciation of current change (see Labov 1994 : 43-112, Bailey et al.
1995, Chambers 1995 : 185-206, Raumolin-Brunberg 1996, for a discussion) on the the assumption that people retain
the pre-adolescent system for the rest of their lives. It requires many years to have a neat picture in real time,
especially in the field of grammar − Labov’s work in Philadelphia has shown that this is more feasible with sound
changes. When the possibility of real-time survey exists, apparent-time might seem useless.
However it still remains interesting for two reasons :
a. It confirms the results of the real-time survey. The distortions encountered, mostly due to different attitudes to
change in a person’s lifetime − there are conservative and progressive people in language as well as in other matters
−will help to extrapolate from other similar surveys when real time is not available ;
b. It gives insights into the dynamics of change : presumably a mixture of generational change and community
change. Only when many such observations have been compiled and confronted shall we know whether the
mechanisms are identical or not when linguistic and social parameters have changed.
This is why such a study of “ diachrony in synchrony ” has been considered interesting. The central period 1835-40
was chosen. Located near the median of the bell-shaped curve of the overall diachronic corpus, it provided sufficient
material for a reliable parallel between two age-groups. In 1835 (see list of writers in the ANNEX), Maria
Edgeworth was 68, Mary and Wm Wordsworth 65, whereas Carlyle was 40, Dickens and Thackeray 23. The two
groups may reasonably be considered as representing, respectively, the younger generation and the older one by the
time when Queen Victoria was crowned (their ages in 1835 are between brackets) :
Group a : Edgeworth (68), Mary and Wm Wordsworth (65), J.J.Ruskin (50).
35
Group b : Carlyle (40), Macaulay (35), Jane Welsh-Carlyle (33), E.B.-Browning (29), Thackeray (24), Dickens (23),
John Ruskin (15). Table 2 gives the densities for the two groups.
TABLE 2
Density for two age groups for the period 1835-1840
a. Age 50-65 : 169
b. Age 15-40 : 260
This would seem to justify the assumption of apparent-time surveys. It gives another perspective than the previous
one where the lifelong productions of two generations were compared. It seems honest to say that this is just
indicative and that a different sample might give different results. The gap between the younger and the older at that
point of time is so clear, however, that it can hardly be disputed. Individual profiles will confirm the trend.
Conclusion :
Not surprisingly, the year-after-year measurement displays a jagged line. Smoothed by decades, it assumes almost
the regularity of a straight ascending line. The arrangement by “ lots ” of equivalent size less evenly distributed over
the years and with contributions differently weighted confirms the same regular increase. By grouping the entire
contribution of letter-writers into two chronological “ generations ”, we can see that those born after 1800 in the first
20 years of the century used twice as many progressives in the same length of text as those born in the last third of
the 18th century, roughly 35 years earlier. At the chosen central point of 1835-40, the picture in apparent-time
confirms very clearly the contrast between the age-groups.
The extraordinary development of this verb-form in the course of the nineteenth century is not a discovery. Yet the
convergence of the results of the multi-faceted approach confirms not only what mere observation of the end points
indicated, but the regularity of the ascent, suggesting further analysis of its conditions and modalities. This will be
the subject of the next sections.
36
III.1.4.. A study of idiolects :
The corpus is not a statistical sample : in fact, we are surveying a group of idiolects. As the support of linguistic
theories or analyses, the idiolect, which is too often the idiolect of the analyst, or collected by elicitation, not by
recording spontaneous utterances, has been criticized by Weinreich, Labov & Herzog 1968 and other corpus-oriented
linguists.
The question however remains that la langue, that Saussurean concept referring to the common properties or
structures of a given language, is as elusive as ever, to the point of being an article of faith : whether it is a common
heritage of the people speaking and writing it now from those who have spoken or written it for centuries, or a more
abstract capacity, an avatar of the universal capacity of language, or a combination of the two, is what linguists of the
different persuasions are trying to elucidate. But everybody should agree that the common property is not evenly
distributed, that idiolects do exist. Merging a large number of idiolects in a random sample reflecting a community
grammar was practically impossible for the present research, unfortunately, but, on the other hand, we can have, on
the point considered, some idea of individual differences in synchronic and microdiachronic terms. Idiolects are
often used and spoken of by linguists, but they are seldom carefully studied for their own sake. Concerning great
writers, we find monographs of their language, usually descriptive and stressing the qualitative distinctions of
“ style ”, including vocabulary, dialect, etc., and this concerns literary works rather than private expression in letters
for example. Before our time, little could be known of the spoken practice, except, occasionally, when early
biographers had heard it or heard of it from family or friends.
The observations presented below are only tentative and limited in scope. Careful study of private letters should be
undertaken for many other features, and even for the whole of a person’s grammar, and would be revealing of the
variety usually dissolved in the grey impersonality of community grammars.45 Fortunately, we do not all speak and
write exactly alike, and below the ordered heterogeneity of groups we find the consistency and inconsistencies of
individual grammars : we will see that they display noticeable differences in the use of the progressive, and in other
parameters. This concerns both the overall production of each writer, and their individual diachronic trajectories.
The study of such variations is not easy : many may just be random, haphazard or erratic. In some cases, until more
sophisticated analyses are tried, all we can do is try to connect phenomena with what we happen to know of a
writer’s life and personality. It is easier to raise questions than to give definite answers.
Some other points will be considered separately with the different aspects of the study ; but, to begin with, the rough
and ready measure of density we have adopted suggests interesting remarks. In their study of the BE/HAVE
variation, Rydén and Brorström 1987 have noted that there are conservative and progressive people. This
corresponds to our common experience of people’s behaviour in many ways : dress, manners, etc. We have already
shown that women as a group in our set are less conservative than men 46
45
Much could certainly be learnt by studying the remarks and character-building in fiction, including observation of
individual grammar and usage by the keen observers writers often are. Dickens is probably the outstanding one, but
he is not the only one. Linguists and literary people have in common an attention to language where linguistic and
metalinguistic processes are in constant interplay; but they do not have the same aims. This will be considered in V.
46
Mossé and Jespersen, in their time, believed in some sort of enrichment in grammar. "l'anglais n'a cessé d'enrichir
les procédés qui permettent de mieux traduire la gamme de plus en plus nuancée des émotions et des sensations",
"un merveilleux moyen d'expression de l'aspect et de l'affectivité que beaucoup de langues peuvent lui envier"Mossé,
1938, II, 274. This is a linguist's view, but we also have to remember that innovation in language, as often in other
domains, is usually judged negatively by most people, especially among the educated, as it is supposed to take us
further from the golden age. A critic of the mid-nineteenth century forged the expression: The Great Victoria
Bridge has been being built more than two years, as one of the ridiculous expressions the progressive passive could
lead to (Marsh, Lectures on the English Language, quoted by Mossé 1938, p.158). By progress, we just mean here
development, novelty, without suggesting positive or negative evaluation.
37
III.1.4.a. Individual total densities :
Figures 4 and 5 give an idea of how individual densities for women and men respectively, arrayed in chronological
order (birth dates), parallel the overall cumulated density displayed on Figure 2. Only the variations between
members of the same generation or about can hint at some individual explanation. It seems also justified to compare
women with women and men with men, preferably.
Concerning the earlier group of people born before 1800, we notice that the highest density (226) is found in Mary
Wordsworth’s letters : a native of the Lake District, she wrote only family letters and she had been more deeply
immersed in the local dialect, which we suspect to have been rich in progressives. We also see that Jane Austen,
only five years younger than Mary Wordsworth, is, with a density of 217, nearly at the same level as the latter, and
noticeably above the other women of the period, although she lived in the South (in Hampshire) in comparatively
refined surroundings. This may be due to the fact that both have written only to family or close friends : but the
same is largely true of the other women, with the exception of Dorothy Wordsworth, an intellectual and a very close
literary companion of her brother the poet. On the other hand, the great novelist is generally, in her novels at least, a
strict follower of late 18th century prescriptivism (Leonard 1929, Phillipps 1970) : and the progressive was still felt
as a novelty at the time, certainly not to be encouraged. Raybould 1957 observed that the use of the progressive in
Jane Austen’s novels is connected with a certain idea of gentility : genteel characters use it less frequently than more
“ vulgar ” people.47 Are we then to conclude that Jane Austen herself was one of the latter ? We must look for
another explanation, and perhaps the very title of one of Jane Austen’s best known novels is a clue : Sense and
sensibility. A sensitive woman, she was already a Romantic and the progressive probably attracted her as a more
personal and effusive form of expression, even when she was not using it as a writer but simply as a sister. Whereas
the simple form was that of the classical expression of sense, the progressive was the new means by which to convey
the subtle shades of sensibility. Which does not mean that a conscious decision led to the choice of one or the other :
on this point, we can only guess.48
If Maria Edgeworth was far behind Jane Austen in that direction, this may be attributed to another cause. She herself
lived in Ireland, where the progressive is known to be a common feature of Anglo-Irish, possibly due to the influence
of a Gaelic periphrasis. 49 But she belonged to the gentry and she wrote mostly from England where she visited
aristocratic and literary circles at a time when Johnsonian prescriptivism was in favour. It is quite probable that,
consciously or unconsciously, she shunned a syntactic form that smelled strongly of celticism and vulgarity : see
above in II. 3. In that respect, her practice was not parallel to that of Jane Austen, her junior by eight years, living in
different surroundings.
Yet, again, we must be cautious with such assumptions when we observe the difference between Mary HutchinsonWordsworth (Density : 226) and her sister Sara Hutchinson (Density: 157) : they had been brought up together, they
lived in the same house, they both wrote family letters. Mary often served as secretary to her husband, and as
amanuensis when his sight failed in old age. Yet she seems to have been less intellectual than her sister, her letters
are more about everyday matters : this may be one of the reasons for the difference, which also may be purely
accidental. We also know that two sisters are seldom really alike : what one prefers is often avoided by the other.
The corpus for both is comparatively small, another reason to be prudent.
The letters written by the women we have just compared are all family letters : degree 1 of intimacy. As far as men
of the same group are concerned, the comparison is more significant if only the same degree of close intimacy is
taken into account. The difference between Wordsworth (Density: 144) and his friend Southey (Density: 176 ) can
hardly be due to their geographical origins, since this would rather contradict the difference : Wordsworth had been
brought up in the Lake District, where Southey, born in Bristol, established his residence only after his marriage. It
is in Southey’s letters that, until recently (Mossé 1938, p. 149-50 and other sources, the N.E.D. especially) 50, the first
instance of the progressive passive was detected, in 1795, when he was only 21 − the second in the present corpus is
in one of Coleridge’s letters — who was then 25. This is perhaps a symptom that Southey, then full of revolutionary
ideas, was also innovative in grammar, which would explain his comparative addiction to the new form, while
47
Cf. also Stanzel 1957: he found that in the novels of Anthony Trollope, much later (after 1850), the progressive
was still more common with the uneducated. His characters often belong to the clergy.
48
See below in V and Figure 34 the parallel between letter-writing and novel-writing.
49
ta se ig baistig ig Corcaigh: it is "at rain" in Cork, where baistig is a verbal noun with "inessive" value, to be
translated "it is raining". Cf.Van Hamel 1912; Sjoestedt 1926; Visser 1955.
50
This point will be taken up in IV.1. with reference to Warner 1995, Denison 1998 and Nakamura 1998.
38
Wordsworth would be more conservative. But the overall difference dissappears and is even reversed, though not
significantly, when we consider their intimate letters only : Wordsworth (Density: 198), Southey (Density: 189).
The two sets of figures have been given just for illustration, although it might suggest a different type of control
between intimate and less intimate letters, in the direction alluded to above, with Southey more free and innovative.
It seems hardly possible to verify it in the corpus, but this is perhaps a valid notion of more general scope, in the
spoken as well as in the written language. 51 Coleridge, on the other hand, with a density of 122 (intimacy 1) against
107 (general), is noticeably behind his two friends. This may be due to the more mixed nature of his correspondence
and the changeability of his temperament, but also to the fact that, travelling and changing his residence on many
occasions, after a period in the Lake District, he was not exposed so constantly to the influence of the local dialect of
the North Western counties.
Both born at the end of the eighteenth century (1795), Keats and Carlyle must be considered apart. Keats’s letters
were all written during the last four years (1817-1820) of his very short life : he was then a young man of 22-26, and
a feverish consumptive. Two suggestions can be offered to explain the exceptionally high density of progressives
(322) in his letters, apart from the cursive, very free way in which they were written : the fact that he was brought up
in the East End of London in humble or at least mixed surroundings, and may have been influenced by the language
of the lower classes, on the one hand, and, on the other, that he was a passionate young man.
Thomas Carlyle is another exception. He lived a long life, the second part in London, but the first part in Scotland.
Much of his private correspondence is addressed to his family there, but the proportion of other letters increased with
time as he became a more popular writer. So that the overall density is not as significant as the trajectory in time,
which will be studied below. With a figure of 252, it is not considerably above that of Macaulay 52 , five years
younger, and below that of his wife Jane Welsh (303) also Scottish by birth : this latter discrepancy must be due to
the tone of his written style, his topics − more abstract discussions − and the greater variety of his correspondents.
The women in the second group, born after 1800, display a density above 300, with the exception of Elizabeth
Barrett-Browning (205 only). This is probably because she had to live abroad, in Italy, from 1844 until her death
from tuberculosis in 1862. If we accept the current notion that the spoken language takes the lead in evolution, the
fact of being largely withdrawn from its influence certainly accounts for a more conservative grammar as well as
vocabulary. This is a well-known phenomenon. She met visitors from England in Florence, of course, but that could
not have the same effect as immersion in the London surroundings. Her companion in Italy was Robert Browning,
who is himself idiosyncratic in shunning the progressive. After Elizabeth’s death in 1862, he came back to England
where he remained for the rest of his long life. His corpus has been surveyed even for that last long period (18621889), but it is too small to be really significant. However, Browning evinces a density of only 132, the smallest of
all in our study except for Coleridge, his senior by 50 years. Some, on account of the intricacies of his introvert
personality and style, will be tempted to see here another manifestation of his originality : he is certainly atypical.
His refusal of the progressive, even in love letters, may also be partly responsible for the low density in Elizabeth’s
letters.
Between the two great novelists Thackeray and Dickens, we notice a neat difference of 75 for the overall density :
Thackeray 345 , Dickens 271. A comparison of the figures for the more reliable degree 1 of intimacy, Thackeray
378, Dickens 268, confirms and enhances the result. This is rather surprising : as a novelist, Thackeray is usually
seen as more conservative in his style, still in the line of 18th century novelists like Fielding. He wrote historical
novels located in that century, Henry Esmond , for example, where we find a low density of 186, and the “ Regency
5151
The parallel between grammatical and political or social attitudes has seldom been attempted. However, Denison
1998, 74 and p.c., has suggested that the presence of the progressive passive in Southey and Coleridge's works may
be due to their radical iconoclastic ideas. The famous chemist Joseph Priestley, a notorious sympathizer with the
French Revolution, who even became a member of the French Convention, would be another interesting case, as well
as Cobbett, whose Rural Rides of 1830 − but published earlier in his Weekly Political Register 1803-1835−, a
mixture of narrative and reflections, exhibit a fairly high density of progressives for the time (141) The author of A
Grammar of the English Language, 1818 and Cobbett's French Grammar, 1823 was however faithful to the old
passive: its exciseman can tell it what is doing even in the little odd corner of Binley ( Rural Rides, 7 Nov. 1825).
Victor Hugo said : "J'ai mis un bonnet rouge au vieux dictionnaire", and that was true of his grammar as well, even
at the time when he was not a very progressive politician. General de Gaulle was known to use coarse language with
his family and close companions, whereas he spoke a very controlled and academic French in public or with less
intimate people.
52
Not a Scotsman, although a regular contributor to the Edinburgh Review and once a MP for Edinburgh.
39
style ” of his writings has been noted (Phillipps 1978). One hypothesis could be the influence of his wife, who was
Irish : but she became insane four years after they married, and they lived separated after that, so that it must have
been a very limited influence. Thackeray was often described as a “ swell ”, a “ gigman ”, as Carlyle called such
people, fond of aristocratic connections and functions. But he was also a relaxed humorist, whose letters are often
illustrated by clever comic sketches, and he does not seem to write differently when he addresses Lady Castlereagh,
for example, or anybody else among his friends and connections : there is often little difference between intimate
and less intimate letters, and in his case, degrees 1 and 2 were difficult to distinguish. Even with degree 3, he is
above the average at the end of his life. No clue can then be given by that consideration. We have seen that Jane
Austen seems to have made the progressive a token of ungenteel characters and we have also shown that she used it
a lot herself in her letters. Then, whatever the reasons for it, we have just to note that Thackeray was comparatively
an addict of the new form, more than Dickens : see also, on Thackeray’s account, Chapter IV on literature. To add
to the discussion, Rydén and Brorström 1987 : 201, have observed that Jane Austen “ stands out as remarkably
conservative in her handling of the be/have paradigm ”− this had already been observed by Phillipps 1979 − whereas
Thackeray is noted as comparatively favourable to the novel forms with have.
So that it seems that people may be erratic and even contradictory with respect to new paradigms : innovative with
some, reluctant with others. To assess whether this apparent heterogeneity is structured would be the task of
studying the grammars of individuals in a systematic manner.
The observations above call for further enquiry. Study of present-day behaviour has already shown some of the
external constraints, at least for groups. One of the major constraints is consciousness, especially of a stigmatized
item. We know that excessive use of the progressive was refused in many circles, mostly because it was supposed to
be a celticism, Scottish or Irish, often a synonym of “ low language ”, sometimes also smelling of “ papism ” in the
case of the Irish. Among testimonials of this, we have caricatures of Irish paddies, as the immigrants were called :
eating potatoes and using progressives or Anglo-Irish expressions were two notorious shibboleths of the paddy, as
evidenced for example in George Borrow’s Lavengro, or in Henry Mayhew’s famous interviews of the small people
in London in the eighteen-forties and sixties (see Mayhew 1967 ; also Thompson’s The making of the English
working class, 1963, 469-85)53. It is quite probable that the stigmatization − a strong word perhaps in this case − was
felt more acutely in Scotland and Ireland, not among the lower orders, but among the literati, more than among the
aristocracy. The latter, as already said, did not bother : the Duke and Duchess of Buccleuch were fond of the
Scottish dialect and certainly felt no shame of their Scottish ascent and accent. What can be identified to a kind of
diglossia may explain that Scott displays a density of progressives (157) hardly higher than that of his friend
Wordsworth (144), although much higher than that of Coleridge (107) : whereas he spoke Scots quite freely and
also a variety of Scottish English (See Aitken & McArthur 1979 ; Tulloch 1980 : 171 sq.), he adhered to the
prescriptivism of his fellow-Scotsman Boswell, the celebrated biographer of Doctor Johnson, who “ was in 1761 one
of the three hundred Scottish gentlemen who took lessons in the correct English pronunciation ” (Tulloch 1980 :
175). Tulloch notes that “ he [Scott] also seems to have shared the view of many of his contemporaries that, at least
since the Scottish king no longer spoke Scots and the old court Scots had died out... English was the “ purer and
more classical tongue ” ”. He also mentions use of the progressive, especially with verbs like think and equivalents :
I’m thinking meaning I imagine, I’m doubting meaning I’m afraid (p.296) as a feature of Scottish grammar in Scott’s
works. At the time of Scott, there was still a feeling of two separate languages, one for local use, the other the only
one acceptable in correct writing although, in Aitken’s terms : “ Around 1785 the extreme self-consciousness and the
strident note of linguistic insecurity which mark the middle years of the [18th] century die out ”( Aitken & McArthur
1979 : 96. Cf. also Romaine 1982 : 136). With the next generation, that of Carlyle, the change in attitudes and
practice becomes more conspicuous. But the question of consciousness, in the absence of objective tests, is difficult
to assess. It is probable, as always, that it concentrated on certain stereotypes, not quantitatively significant, such as :
someone is wanting you, etc.
53
"The expressions 'the master is calling you', 'he is speaking to you,' 'were you ringing ?' 'I was supposing,' 'he is not
intending' are Scotticisms for 'the master calls...'"Alexander Bain, Higher English Grammmar 1863. Bain was
professor at the University of Aberdeen. He extends his criticism beyond what were still the usual stereotypes. The
trial of Jessie M'Lachlan in 1862 (Roughead 1950) is an interesting piece of evidence on the progressive in Scotland,
especially among the poorer classes: Jessie, a poor servant who escaped the gallows only because she was granted a
reprieve following a public campaign, says, for example "I had been intending to go...; another witness:" she was
needing it, I suppose; she said that I could not be got when she was wanting me"...These were typical expressions.
However, the density in the witnesses'statements is only 243, lower than in our letters at the time: but crossquestioning in Court does not encourage familiarity, and the statements may have been emended by the clerks.
40
The new passive progressive is clearly a form which people were conscious of (Mossé 1938 : 155-158), but it
accounts very little for the density we have measured. As to the other progressives, except perhaps with some verbs
like want or like, or, generally speaking, state or “ private ” verbs, their development, which we find remarkably
rapid from the point of view of conventional diachrony, was too slow to be felt as clearly as, for example, the
introduction of new words or phrases. It is then quite plausible that the intrusion of this device was mostly felt by
those who had sufficient contact with the common people, who were probably the first to have used it extensively,
and before all, the immigrates from Scotland and Ireland − an immigration which grew by degrees, but became
important after 1840 and the great famine of 1847-8 (Cf. Archer-Jackson 1963 ; Lawton 1959.)
So much for groups and communities, but what about individuals ? We know that their attitudes are not uniform,
even − and possibly above all − among the intelligentsia, witness the warm debates in France whenever a new
attempt is made at spelling reform (the latest was in 1992). The progressive passive was the most conscious
innovation and it began to raise diverse reactions as soon as 1822 when, in The Gentleman’s Magazine, one reader
censored it, another supported it as solving the ambiguity of the old form : “ the letter is writing ” ; and the debate
continued for more than 50 years (Mossé 1938, 155-8).
To conclude, the degree of consciousness was probably small and hesitant, and limited to some stereotypes
supposedly Irish or Scottish. As to the attitudes, we know that attitudes to language use are not necessarily parallel
to those concerning other domains such as fashion, science, or politics, nor are they consistent at different times of
history : born under the reign of late 18th century prescriptivism, the 19th century was led to more freedom with
romanticism and the contemporary industrial and social revolution. This would be the general frame within which to
inscribe individual reactions. Here, we cannot forget we are dealing with artists of the pen who, consciously or
unconsciously, may have individually a liking for or an aversion to such and such a form of expression. They may
occasionally have justified it, but no mention of this with reference to the progressive was found in our collections of
letters. The novels may give a few hints : Romola, by G. Eliot, displays a high density (360), suggesting deliberate
choice : see below in V.1. This liking or aversion is found also among ordinary people. Needless to repeat that the
argument can be evoked only when the deviation from the average is significant.
III.1.4.b. Individual trajectories
As a complement to idiolectal sums, the study of individual diachronic profiles may help in the study of two
important points :
1. Is there any significant difference between individual trajectories and the general line of evolution ? The most
reasonable hypothesis on this account is that people vary in this respect and that the general trend is just the average
of their relative speeds. This is connected with the problems summed up as community change v. generational
change : Labov 1994, 83. On the whole, however, the deviations must not be great.
2. When the individual line displays peaks or depressions, are they significant and if they are, of what ? Can such
deviations be related to what we know of the person’s existence ?
This is certainly an ambitious program, requiring fine measurements for which we may not have the requisite tools,
and a critical analysis of the observations. Again, we have to stress that this is just a pilot study of limited scope,
hoping that it may open the way to others.
One of the obstacles is once more the uneven distribution of the corpus along the years. So that, for example, if we
compare the figures for any single writer with the overall figure at a given five-year period, we are in fact comparing
them with a small set of other individuals whose letters happen to have been preserved for the same period. For that
reason, comparing two or more individuals may be more instructive. To sum up, we shall be happy if a few
suggestions can be encouraged by the data : students of ancient or medieval history have to fight against much
greater odds.
The study has been attempted, first by considering individual trajectories and those of sets of people who have
something in common.
Some of the writers have to be omitted from this inspection : for different reasons, the figures would not be
significant. John Ruskin’s parents have left a number of letters too small to offer more than an occasion to check the
difference with their son. His own contribution, discontinuous and limited to 200 000 words, displays a decrease
possibly due to subject matter, since, in the later letters, he wrote mostly about his experiences as a painter in Venice.
Maria Edgeworth’s contribution is uneven and displays no clear profile. Many of her letters were sent from
41
England : unfortunately there is not enough material to study a possible difference between these and the letters she
wrote when she lived in Ireland, where she might have been influenced by the local dialect. The letters of the
Brownings are scattered in various publications : Robert Browning, as we noted, did not like the progressive, and
there is no significant variation around his very low score of 132 during his long existence, even in his love letters,
when Elizabeth Barrett appears to have reacted differently. But, with a corpus of only 200 000 words for Robert,
half of what Elizabeth wrote during a much shorter period, this estimate may be wrong : it is only highly probable,
and could possibly be confirmed on the basis of his literary works ; a doubtful solution, since he wrote practically
only verse, and highly elaborate verse at that. Perhaps he ought to have been entirely left out, but after all, nonconformists and eccentrics have a right to be included in a survey.
The study will consider successively two diachronic groups or “ generations ”, and the other letter-writers will be
seen individually.
The Lake poets : The poets commonly known as the Lake poets and their companions form an interesting group of
six men and women of the same age who lived in fairly close association, to the point of sharing the same house,
temporarily or for a long time − the Wordsworth family, where William lived at Dove Cottage or Rydal Mount with
his wife, his sister Dorothy and his sister-in-law Sara Hutchinson. On Figure 6, we can see at once that their
densities are close to each other. However, the women display a higher density, as already observed. Two members
of the group show some originality : Mary Wordsworth with noticeably higher figures than the rest, Coleridge with
smaller figures. This just corresponds to what has been said above concerning the total individual densities. If we
look at the curves, we see that they are almost flat, with a slight rise in the case of William Wordsworth whose long
life was spent almost entirely in the Lake District. His wife Mary is the only one to display an irregular profile, but
the abrupt peak before the end is clearly not significant and probably due to the small size of the relevant corpus.
The only certainty, or near-certainty, is that her general density is higher than that of the others. She appears to
have begun with a high figure −she was born in the district − but this may also be an artifact of corpus size. To be
frank, it is not surprising that they all follow the average tendency, since their contribution to it is considerable.
However, as time goes on, there are newcomers − the percentage of the older group passing from 83% to 33 % from
period 1 to period 8 − and we must admit that the curve for William Wordsworth, whose correspondence was still
fairly voluminous at the end of his life (200,000 words after the age of 70), seems to be rising with the tide : Figure
7. The distinction of intimate letters from the rest is too discontinuous to justify conclusions concerning his whole
career, but these intimate letters show a clearly higher density for that last period : this is probably the main reason
for his ascending general score. We may also consider that, as he grew old, living in the Lake counties, he was
indulging more freely in what had always been a feature of the local speech, no longer contradicted as it used to be
by the King’s English : after all, HE was now one of the people of influence on the question of what was good
English, just as we recently saw the Beatles be among the modern arbiters. Is this making too much of mere
indices ?
Looking more closely at the curves, we notice a fairly accented peak for the three friends, Coleridge, Wordsworth
and Dorothy Wordsworth, at period 2 (1800-1804). That was indeed the time when they lived and wandered
together in the Lake District (and even undertook a tour to Scotland, visiting Scott), a time of intense excitement,
physical and moral, one of the peaks of poetic creativity, before Coleridge, always in quest of somewhere else,
escaped for his Mediterranean voyage to Malta in 1804. At that time, they had all just passed the age of thirty, and
were busy with the publication of the second edition of the Lyrical Ballads, one of the landmarks of romanticism.
Each of the three had his own reactions, and we don’t see the same peak in the profile of their other friend Robert
Southey, who, however, was somehow apart, even before he left for Portugal. 54 One is tempted to establish some
connection between this verbal symptom and the extraordinary excitement of their life in the Lakes. This suggestion
is encouraged by the fact that it is not an individual deviation, but that the three protagonists of the Lyrical Ballads’
revolution are sharing it : Figure 8 .
54
He once (Oct. 1798) attacked the Lyrical Ballads, anonymously, in the Critical Review. Southey was a native of
Bristol, but came to live in the Lake District.
42
We must also note the depression which follows, before the line resumes its ascent, much less pronounced.55 That
was a period when the enthusiasm − this is the appropriate word − of the first decade of the century gave place to
disquietude, or even Dejection, the title of a famous ode by Coleridge56 : he himself was gone, although he sent
letters from Malta. After a period of peace with France, the peace of Amiens in 1802, the French Revolution, in
which they still saw the birth of liberty despite the excesses of the Terror, had been confiscated by a tyrant and the
Napoleonic wars had begun. It would be ridiculous, of course, to look for a point-to-point correspondence between a
linguistic phenomenon and the atmosphere where a small group of people lived, if there were not other instances
where the same correlation can be guessed. 57
Walter Scott’s long collection of letters has not been completely surveyed but the line is also ascending in his case,
roughly similar to the general curves of Wordsworth and the Lake poets − except Southey and Coleridge as already
noted : Figure 9.
Jane Austen and John Keats can hardly be compared to the Lake poets. Keats’s letters cover a brief period (18171820) so that he cannot show any clear evolution. Jane Austen was actually 5 years younger than Wordsworth, but
she died in 1817 at 42. Her letters, most of them addressed to her sister Cassandra, were written between 1796 and
1817, over a period of 20 years : this is sufficient to justify a brief survey. By grouping the data in order to have
enough material for the density counts to be really comparable, we see that the density in her letters passes from
about 100 before 1805, to 200 for the period 1805-1809 and to 300 for the last period, 1810-17. This is indeed an
abrupt progression, compared to that of the Lake poets and to the general curve : Figure 10. Although a comparison
with her novels, all published during the last period, cannot parallel this, we note that in her last one, Emma (1816)
progressives reach the stupendous density of above 400 ; see chapter V on literature (Figure 34) and Phillipps 1970,
p.111-16. She was certainly a pioneer in using the form.
If we consider now the next “ generation ”, the picture is more blurred : Figure 11. Dickens, Thackeray, Mrs
Gaskell were of the same age : the three novelists exhibit an ascending diachronic curve, more regular in the case of
Thackeray, more jagged for the two others.
A close study revealed that the peak in Mrs Gaskell’s profile is connected to her correspondence with her daughters,
Marianne (“ Polly ”) especially : Figure 12. Even within the stratum of intimate letters, this correspondence
illustrates the weight of the intimacy dimension, and the difficulty to have a strict and stable discrimination. The
55
Anthony Warner (p. c., 1999) offers the following and very interesting suggestions on my paper of 1998: “ there
might be some element of age-grading for the lakeland poets, as in Labov’s account of Cedergen’s Panama data.
Their ages march together; there is a peak roundabout age 35, then a decline. Could this be a reflex of a hostile
evaluation in the 18th C evidenced by the ‘flattening of the curve’ noted by Strang... Also perhaps seen in
Hutchinson, Mary W (and consistent with Keats) though distinctly not seen in Southey. The mechanism might be
rejection of the hostile evaluation, then acceptance of it, ultimately overtaken by an increase in later life reflecting
communal change. It the hostile evaluation weakens or is refocussed in 19C, then such an effect might not be seen
among those born after 1800. I appreciate that a change from below is not supposed to show such evaluations, which
may be enough to rule out such an account, and though the progressive is being passive is clearly subject to
evaluation later, that might be referred to the salience of the sequence. But you clearly suggest that the question of
evaluation is not a simple one in this case, and the object of evaluation might not be the progressive per se but the
extent of its use, or its presence as an indication of personal involvement or ‘warmth’. ”
This seems to me quite plausible, and the validity of the hypothesis should certainly be tested for other cases,
including contemporary ones. One of the major difficulties is to assess the degree of consciousness of a given
change, especially when it is a change of magnitude. A parallel with habits other than linguistic can be attempted:
we are often more indulgent than we claim...
56
As a matter of fact, this Letter to Sara Hutchinson was begun in the spring of 1802, but Richard Holmes, in his
magnificient biography of Coleridge, underlines the difference between the first and the final version of the autumn
of the same year: "the first version is a passionate declaration of love and renunciation, of almost hysterical
intensity; the final version is a cool, beautifully shaped, philosophical Ode on the loss of hope and creative power."(
Holmes 1990: 318). Coleridge's visionary romanticism is outside the grasp of a down-to-earth study like ours: but
the parallelism with the Wordsworths is clear for that period, nevertheless.
57
I am quite aware that this is returning to a Humboldtian, pre-Saussurean conception of "parole", also found with
Anton Marty. A French follower of Freud may also be quoted about this: "Ne pourraît-on caractériser chaque
procédé grammatical, chaque syntagme, chaque élément de style, en tant que conduite? Et considérer le choix de
telle ou telle expression verbale comme une conduite symbolique bien définie ?" Rostand 1951:10.
43
term spontaneity, because it combines the warmth of the feelings and the cursiveness of the style, finds in her case its
most blatant justification : all she writes seems to flow from the heart without restraint, reaching the highest peaks
we have found. Part of this may be due to the fact that Elizabeth Gaskell lived in the North : she was born in
Cheshire and, after marrying a Unitarian minister, spent part of her life in Manchester, where she was in contact with
the the same working class which is described in Engels’s famous book. We remember too that Irish immigration
was developing in the area, especially at that time (Archer-Jackson 1963). In her novels, there is also a significant
and continuous increase of the density, from a little above 200 in Mary Barton 1847 to almost 400 in Cousin Phillis
1863 or Wives and Daughters (unfinished when she died in 1865). But we realize that the warm tone of her letters to
Marianne becomes colder by 1860. As a matter of fact, the year by year graph —not presented here— smoothed by
the 5-year periods’curve, displays a clear trough precisely in the year 1862 : from 400 progressives to less than 100.
One is tempted to connect it to a serious crisis in the relations between the mother and the daughter : when she was
in Rome in 1862, Marianne met Dr. Manning, the Roman Catholic priest who was later to become Cardinal
Manning, and she appeared to be on the point of converting to Roman Catholicism. On learning this, the devoted
Unitarian Elizabeth Gaskell was serious affected. According to her biographer, she was subject to fits of depression,
but in this case it was a severe one : she even had to take to bed (Gérin 1976 : 226). Things finally turned
differently since Marianne eventually did not become a Roman Catholic, but the shock must have left some trace.58
If, for the sake of statistical significance, we neglect the ascent corresponding to the period 1848-1853 or about,
when letters to the girls were so numerous and passionate, and merely compare the global figures before 1860 and
after that date, we find an abrupt decrease from 509 to 391. The overall figure concerning all familiar letters is of
course seriously affected so that a comparison would be fruitless, but we have no reason to ascribe this to a general
reversal of her language practice, witness the continuing ascent in the novels (see V. 2, Figure 36).
No deep insight can be obtained from a study of Dickens’s and Thackeray’s curves, even by considering intimate
correspondence only. Concerning Thackeray, the distribution of his letters during the early years and the uneven size
of the corpus do not encourage interpretation : the only safe assumption is that, in later periods, between the ages of
30 and 52 (when he died), his curve is steadily ascending for all degrees of intimacy : Figure 13 The same
ascending curve is observed with Dickens for the whole of his production : Figure 14 .
For the three degrees of intimacy, Macaulay’s curve is ascending, but we are struck by the comparatively abrupt
descent at period 10 (1840-4) : Figure 15 ; and we are tempted to ascribe this to a crisis in his personal existence.
1835 was the year when his beloved sister Hannah, whom he used to address as “ my darling ”, married. A bachelor
who was then 35, he had kept with her and his other sister Margaret a very intimate correspondence. She appears,
even more than Margaret, to have been the focus of his affections, and his biographers have noted that he was
seriously disturbed, and possibly depressed, by her marriage. We will again refrain from too bold an assumption
concerning the influence of psychological crises on a formal feature of speech, and also remark that, after the
marriage, he could no longer write in the same confidential tone : his letters could now be read by his brother-in-law
as well ; intimacy was disturbed. A closer examination of the density in the letters to Hannah (in 1832, they were
addressed to both Hannah and Margaret) reveals indeed a clear contrast between the period preceding Hannah’s
marriage and after that event :
before 1835 : 255
after 1835 : 197
Our research had to be interrupted for the Carlyles when only part of their correspondence had been published in the
Duke-Edinburgh edition with vol. 11, ending in 1839. For the following 46 years, apart from a selection of letters to
his wife −not included − the only corpus was a collection of letters to his brother Alexander. On Figure 16, beside
the higher density in family letters already noted, we notice that the curve for Thomas Carlyle is descending : all
letters, even the most intimate − the majority − are affected. This may be attributed to his “ education ” : the young
son of Scottish peasants was becoming an intellectual, a writer, frequenting other circles where, even in Edinburgh,
the influence of dialect was less effective, and finally settling in London in 1834 (period 9). Carlyle was a man with
strong family ties : many of his letters are addressed to his mother, who was still living in a Scottish village, and
could hardly write, or to his brothers, his sister or his niece. His brother Jack then became a doctor and left
Scotland. But the other, Alexander (Alick), was a farmer who left Scotland to establish himself in a farm in Canada.
A comparison of the general density for all of Carlyle’s letters, including those to Alick, and of his letters to the latter
58
This is a case where intuition precedes information. I had not had access to the biography before noticing the down
slope and its specific reason remained mysterious until I was acquainted with the biographical data.
44
only, after 1839 (the only collection we have reviewed after that date), may be instructive of the influence of the
addressee :
Overall density : 252 (246 excluding Alick’s after 1839);
Density in letters to Alick (1840-76) : 325.
When addressing his farmer brother, he was still using the language they spoke in the Scottish village where they
were brought up, and where they met again from time to time before Alick left. Among intimate letters as we have
computed them, there is some mixture. It might be interesting to study separately the letters addressed to the clan in
Dumfries.
The Brownings : Figure 17 . The Brownings’ corpus is dispersed between several collections of volumes, especially
for Elizabeth Barrett-Browning. One consists of their love letters of 1845-46. It is difficult to establish degrees of
intimacy in E.Barrett-Browning’s correspondence, and this would probably bring little benefit : her published letters
are to friends (Mrs. David Ogilvy, Miss Mitford, Mr. Boyd, Mr. Kenyon) or to her sister. We see that the total
density is 204, whereas Robert’s is only 132, and even 110 (118 for intimate letters), if the letters written after 1880
are included. This is another case of a woman’s using progressives more than a man. It has already been noted that
her comparatively low density is probably due to her removal from the evolution in England. Yet, without making
too much of it, we have to note that, in her love letters (periods 11 & 12) the density reaches 282 against 211 for the
whole period before. No such peak is found in Robert’s love letters : passion did not make him forget his
conservative grammar, perhaps. We can also remember, when we compare Robert and Elizabeth, the love letters
addressed to Fanny Brawne, 25 years earlier, by another fervid consumptive, John Keats (density 322 for all his
letters).
Last but not least, we have George Eliot. The study of her correspondence (Arnaud 1979) is partly at the origin of
the present work. In that pilot study the result was perhaps too beautiful : the density displayed a regularly ascending
line from 257 to 367. The picture presented here (Figure 18) remains practically identical59. So that George Eliot
is a typical case of someone who accompanied the microdiachronic evolution, and must even have been among its
leaders.
As we have seen, when there are individual variations, they can be suspected to have idiolectal reasons related to the
vicissitudes of each person’s life. Applied to a very different type of historical quest, and to individual grammars
inasmuch as they reflect community grammar, this would have rejoiced the neo-grammarians as supporting their
theory that the laws of linguistic evolution are inescapable, mutatis mutandis. See Labov 1979, 1994 and his
references ; see also Leskien 1876, who seems to have been the first neo-grammarian, in the context of comparative
grammar (Normand et al. 1978). Of course the mutatis mutandis is important, and it is to be hoped that other studies
of living and extinct language-use will give precisions about it.
Conclusions
As usual with social surveys, especially when they relate to the past, there is some heterogeneity in the corpus. The
22 people studied are not strictly parallel : some lived a long life (William and Mary Wordsworth, Carlyle,
Browning), others had a brief existence (Keats, Jane Austen). Their surroundings were different, even if they
belonged to the same set of literate and even literary people. The letters they have left vary in volume and in their
distribution across the years. It is all the more surprising that the discrepancies between them are not greater.
a. Total individual densities. We have noted that women show consistently a higher density than men, especially if
only intimate letters are considered : many of the men have had more occasions to write to less intimate or even
remote people, often on intellectual or business topics. This being said, and if we consider the total lifelong corpora,
few people stand really apart from their contemporaries. Among people born before 1800, the only one really
exceptional is John Keats : with a figure of 322, he is nearly on the same level as John Ruskin, 23 years younger.
Some will certainly remark that they had very different temperaments, the author of Sesame and Lilies on the colder
side and the lover of Fanny Brawne on the warmer side.
Allowing for the inevitable deviations of sampling, the only one to stand apart as clearly conservative among those
born after 1800, is Robert Browning (110) : the writer of often long poems or plays, he was not prolix in his letters.
59
Degree 3 has been omitted, being often absent, and in the general density curve periods 17 and 18 have been fused.
Degree 2 shows less regular progression, not presented here, and of dubious significance.
45
b. Individual trajectories. Whenever it appears that a trajectory can be significant of individual progress, our letterwriters usually follow the general trend. We have every reason to think that this was normally unconscious. No one
among them has ever openly expressed diffidence or hostility against a form which was not really new but simply
increasing − except Macaulay for the new passive. Some even appear to have been leaders : Jane Austen, Elizabeth
Gaskell and George Eliot especially, but also, surprisingly, Thackeray. Some of the reasons will perhaps be found in
their literary works : yet, this would require a careful, detailed study.
Nobody presents a descending line ; at most the line is flat, with occasional variations, probably random. Apart from
Browning, whose refusal was constant, only two display no clear rise : Coleridge and Southey. We know that
Coleridge was unstable, that he became an opium eater, that the Romantic poet of Christabel and The Ancient
Mariner was also a penetrating London critic and lecturer, devoted to abstract prose, philosophical or religious, and
that his correspondence is a mixture of discussions of all kinds, rather than everyday news : this may account for the
low figure which knew no increase. Southey’s case is certainly different : complete survey of his correspondence
would perhaps be more instructive.
It is often said that exceptions confirm the rule. Let them at least confirm that we have not tried to force the point
and that what was suggested by one case and then another leads to the general notion that such convergence cannot
be entirely fortuitous, and that there is some connection between people’s lives and personalities and the language
they use, even when unconscious grammar is in question.
III.2. Linguistic factors
In the conception of the coding matrix, the theoretical tenets of the hypothetical-deductive tradition have been kept
reasonably loose. The analysis of the English verb-system by linguists of different persuasions, usually supported by
corpora or elicitations from present-day English, has led to some consensus : see I.3. We are all convinced that
these factors, with different weights, are the most effective ones : consequently, they ought to be largely responsible
for the extension of the progressive, especially at the time when it became so widespread.60
This assumption was supported by a few observations, not clearly quantified : for example, use of the progressive
with state verbs have always been said to increase, as well as that with modal auxiliaries, and even occasional
occurrence in contexts admittedly blocking it : Ljung 1980 presents original and insightful analyses on some
present-day virtualities. Arnaud 1973, a synchronic study for the period 1840-1880, suggested that, among other
factors of change, the aspectual properties of predicates played an essential role.
Among the hypotheses, we must also mention those involving implicational scaling (De Camp 1973) and “ squish ”
(cf. Sag 1973) : a hierarchical ordering of factors can be supposed to govern the stages of the diachronic
development.
In order to investigate such questions, the coding framework includes also contextual elements of the sentence,
sometimes of secondary, informative value for the exploration of what is still a terra incognita.
The following does not claim to be the last word on linguistic factors, even within the limits of the corpus
considered ; nor does it claim that what has been observed can be extended to other similar domains of
microdiachrony without precaution. There are many risks of bias :
1. The corpus itself is uneven ( e.g. the beginning and end periods are under-represented) ;
2. The allotment of verb-predications to semantic classes is notoriously difficult (see I.3 ). More sophisticated
justification of it by the use of tests and the computation of a network of syntactic structural or transformational
capacities, as was attempted in Arnaud 1973, 616-21, would imply either an impossible amount of work or the
limitation of the number of items, forbidding meaningful quantification.
III.2.1. Semantic classes
Figures 19-24 show the main results of the computation of verb classes.
60
This puts the important question of grammaticalization. Semantic shift accompanies historical development, in
grammar as well as in vocabulary. What we call “ progressive forms ” in Old English or even in Renaissance
English is obviously different from what the progressive is now. The moment when grammaticalization occurs is
still the subject of interesting investigations. It seems plausible to date it from the middle of the 18th century: see
General conclusion.
46
1.a. State verbs (Figure 19) : The group of state verbs (Class 1 to class 4) evidences a remarkable increase in
density, especially at the end of the period : this will require further study (see IV.6. below), since it is a sensitive
domain, where even individual verbs must be considered. But the weight of this group is small on the overall
increase : in average, of the order of 2 percent. With so small figures, statistical significance can be disputed
(Poisson’s law), but the general orientation seems clear.
1.b. Prospective and retrospective verbs ( Figure 20 ) : these predications have been treated as subclasses of state
verbs, in accordance with a tradition which should certainly be reconsidered. They are far from averse to the
progressive in our corpus, and this should also increase our diffidence with the notion of activity commonly
associated to the progressive. A distinction has often been made between external and internal activity : prospective
and retrospective verbs are seen as “ private ” verbs (Ota, 1963 ; Joos, 1964 ; Ljung, 1980) referring to the latter type
of activity, whereas, for example, think was usually seen as an ordinary process verb. There is little doubt that there
is an aspectual component in them which brings them closer to the other classes in the line of our semantic analysis
in I.2. Many of them are also emotionally loaded, a fact which may be largely responsible for their share in a corpus
of private letters : feelings are commonly associated to the mere statement of facts. A more detailed development
will be found in IV.7.
2. Movement verbs (Figure 21) : Strictly speaking, movement verbs (Cl.20-21) do not form a separate class in
terms of aspectual properties : they are rather a subclass of process verbs, with spatial support, and a spatial goal for
bounded ones ; this explicitly spatial dimension was the reason for the separation of the subclass from the others,
although there are few verbal notions without a spatial component ; but it is less explicit, or sometimes abstract or
figurative61. In Figure 21, where classes 20 and 21 have been cumulated by decades, they seem to diverge a little
from the main trend (General density). In terms of percentage, a slight decrease was also observed, especially in the
last decade. This does not mean that people moved less in the eighteen eighties than a century before, but that this
class of verbs, which were the pioneers of the progressive into the verb system, in company with locatives, saw their
comparative frequency challenged by other predicates ; unless a complete study of all verb-frequencies showed that,
for various reasons, there was also regular decrease in the use of movement verbs at non-progressive forms in the
letters, which is unlikely. On this account, a remark seems in point : movement verbs are more versatile than they
look ; there are many figurative expressions using them, and, whereas this does not alter their basic meaning, it may
affect their frequency according to subject matter or idiosyncratic tendencies. In this respect, a larger number of
letter-writers would be an advantage, by limiting the risk of idiolectal bias. On the other hand, figurative use
compensates for possible restriction of true movement verbs. Admittedly, ordinary movement verbs are athematic :
they appear in a great variety of situations.
3. Locative verbs (Figure 21) : with an average a little over 5 % of all progressives, this class also seems to
diverge slightly from the main trend in terms of densities across the decades. In the pilot study (Arnaud 1973), it
appeared that these verbs were of high frequency in the progressive, along with movement verbs. The justification
for this Eleatic paradox has been given in I.2. In present-day English, the progressive is so frequent with verbs like
lie, sit or live, etc. that we underestimate their use with the simple form. Second to movement verbs in their affinity
with the progressive, they kept their position better in terms of percentage. The list of lexical items is short, and
consists of verbs which are found in a large number of situations : lie, live, sit, stand, stay, etc. See also the lists of
glottochronology for basic notions in all languages past or present (Swadesh 1952). There are borderline cases : e.g.
wait has been registered here among prospective verbs, and lounge among unbounded descriptive verbs. Some of
them, for example kneel, lounge, etc. can be topic-bound expressions of position or posture just as run, stride, march,
stroll, etc. are varieties of movement linked to a definite situation.
*
4. Processes : the results of the diachronic study of processes are even less significant than those concerning
movement and locative verbs. Subclasses have been established for the coding of predications, mainly by
discriminating bounded and unbounded processes. The two subclasses have also been divided further, in an attempt
to study separately progressive processes (bounded), and descriptive predications (unbounded) : see I.3.3.a. It was
not unreasonable to expect some enlightenment from the study of their respective behaviour, within the general
framework of an implicational scale, not developed in this study.
61
This is an epistemological question, linked to the conceptualisation of "activity" as movement. Aristotle's
conceptualisation of time in the Physics is derived from movement.
47
The observations are presented in Figure 22. Various methods have been tried to get as complete a picture as
possible : individual profile of each class, by periods, decades, or equivalent lots in time sequence, cumulated data
for several classes or sub-classes to minimize possible bias in the distribution. Only the most significant curves are
presented here.
There seems to be a hint that the development of bounded processes (Cl. 31+32) diverged from the main trend of
density increase in being slightly slower. This is not altogether unexpected : the paragon of bounded processes are
operations leading to a concrete, observable result. Building a house, writing a letter are creative processes, whereas
breaking a pitcher, or burning a log are destructive, but they all end in an accomplishment which can be described
by a perfect : the house is built, the pitcher is broken. This is one of the most ancient foundations of the theories of
aspectual values, in connection with voice. What is significant at the period of reference is the appearance of the
new progressive passive, the house is being built, not because of its frequency (see IV,1 below) but as a test of the
original meaning of all process progressives, suggested by the old form the house is building. They are, so to say,
symmetrical with respect to subject − agent or cause − and object − patient. The semantics and the terms adapted to
it have raised and still raise endless discussions (see I.2.). It would seem that, at the end of the 18th century at least,
the progressive is centered on the process itself, as being the state preceding the result, and leading to it. “ State ”
referring to spatio-temporal location, by definition transitory, and also to spatial properties susceptible of
transformation ; derived and figurative extensions have complicated the picture. No surprise then that bounded
processes should be the first to be affected by the change : their dominance was challenged by other predicates.
This is parallel to the comparative decrease of movement and locative verbs. In other words, those predicates which
had already conquered the place did not participate as much in the increase as the newcomers. Among the latter,
state predications are clearly winners, but with little influence in quantitative terms, as already noted. As to
unbounded predications, they seem to have at least kept their percentage, which means that the general increase is
mostly affecting them. But these conclusions are only tentative, considering the fragility of the statistics.
Subclass 33 (unbounded, descriptive) was hypothezised to be one of the loci of the development. One of the
observations the reader of the letters makes is the frequency, at the beginning of the period, of expressions like : it
rained, the wind blew when we left, etc. which would seldom be heard or written today. This shows once more how
close the progressive is to adjectival phrases, not referring to a process but just to a property ut nunc. Even in the
case of the “ activity ” of sleep, if we do not adhere to the strict semantics of “ one word, one meaning ”, we note the
equivalence of she is sleeping and she is asleep. There are languages, like Japanese, where a “ verb ” will be used to
describe what we conceive as a state, and others like Basque or Irish where the water boils is translated by something
like : the water is in ebullition ; cf. Basque ura irakitsen du, where -en is the inessive morpheme. In French l’eau est
en ébullition is a quite acceptable translation, in more formal style, of the water is boiling, just another degree of
being hot, bouillante. Similarly with les cerisiers sont en fleurs, les cerisiers sont fleuris, to translate : the cherry
trees are blooming : cf. in full bloom or blossom. Thanks to the progressive, the adjectival force of the verb is put
into prominence. This is not indulging in a simplistic finalist or functionalist notion of progress in language to say
that, in this case, the evolution has some logical justification. Process can be a misleading term, just as activity.
Paraphrastic gloss reveals at least the ambiguity of verbal sentences where no agentivity can be clearly observed,
such as metereological expressions : the sun is shining, the wind is blowing.62 In ancient French, Bluebeard’s wife
says to sister Anne : Je ne vois que la route qui poudroie et que l’herbe qui verdoie. It just means that the road is
smothered in dust and the grass green : no activity is implied. Often, in logical terms, we have analytic statements,
as Alexander Bain 1870 : 14 had already noted, without remarking that this is due to the canonic binary structure of
English.63 The fire is burning, the wind is blowing are typical : it just means that the fire exists (for the moment),
there is (some) wind, it is windy, etc. Yet, contrary to expectations, no clear precedence of that descriptive subclass
has been observed in the counts, whether in terms of densities or percentages : it follows the main course of
unbounded predications.
It has often been said that the progressive solves the ambiguity of the simple form between momentary and lasting
interpretation, especially with indeterminate subjects : snow falls was ambiguous, snow is falling is not. This is
particularly true with this type of verbs, and justifies the subclass. As most other classes, it is not tight : the
62
Cf. on this point the discussion on inaccusatives ( Perlmutter 1978, Ruwet 1988). This evokes the question of
Indo-european animism and the status of the nominative. In ancient Greek, however, Zeus vei appears later than
impersonal vei.( Benveniste 1966: 230).
63
"Fire burns is not a real proposition. It merely repeats, or unfolds, the chief attribute of the subject. Our earliest,
and most persistent notion of fire, is the same as is expressed by burning".
48
adjectival force of the progressive is underlined here, but we still can observe it with a more “ active ” subject, even
human : he is working is just another way of saying he is busy and not idle. There is a special class of adjectives
referring to temporary states or occupations : asleep/awake, angry/merry, sober/ drunk, cloudy/ fair ; ill or sick/fine,
etc. are examples, whereas some others are susceptible of less actualized interpretations : happy or sad, for
example.
For subclass 32 (progressives), the curve, not presented here, does not show any clear increase in density. All
bounded predications − except for the so-called punctual events − 64are in fact progressive : this is certainly what
suggested that very disputable name of “ progressive form ”. Even meet or burst or jump can imply steps. But there
is a class of verbs which are not very difficult to tag as specifically oriented to a goal in the same manner as Achilles
running behind Zeno’s tortoise : see list in the ANNEX. The idea is that they are among the predications most likely
to use the progressive. We would be tempted to say that, if they do not show significant increase in the period
surveyed, it is for the same reason as for locative predications : they had already won the race.
To conclude on the chapter of predicational classes, though the figures cannot be considered as indisputably
significant, they tend to support ordinary experience and the assumptions of the majority of linguists. All we can say
is that the distribution of the different classes and subclasses was not profoundly disturbed in the course of the
century. Locative verbs retained their share, movement verbs possibly had to make some room for other process
verbs. With reference to the latter, the slight difference observed between bounded processes and unbounded
processes may be explained in the following manner.
Originally, about the middle of the 18th century, the progressive can be seen as a sort of middle-voice, focussing on
the “ event ” itself, not necessarily a process, but only a temporary condition. When the next stage is seen as a result,
the momentary stage refers to a temporary property of the subject-agent if the orientation is “ active ” or of the
“ patient ”, if the orientation is “ passive ”, although in fact both are involved 65. So that bounded processes were
normally leaders in the success of the form. The extension to unbounded events, with just a termination, eventually
delayed, came later.66 This is parallel to the development of have with intransitive perfects (Rydén & Brorström
1987). 67 With unbounded intransitives, once the terminal point has been passed, the perfect is one way of looking
back on the previous stage at the same time as describing the present one succeeding it (present relevance).
Whereas, when the new stage had not been reached, the progressive was a description of the only participant, the
subject.
It is difficult to give definite conclusions on this extensive study of verb classes : this may be due partly to the nature
of the corpus, to the distribution of predications in their respective classes, or even to the semantic analyses behind
them. New theoretical developments may permit new insights into the matter : there is some reason to doubt
whether they would considerably alter this unconclusive aspect of the survey. The upward movement seems to
affect almost evenly the whole system, extending to all types of predications, and more conspicuously to those
which had not yet been much affected, the state verbs, and to unbounded processes, an extensive class always adding
to its lexicon.
III.2.2. Verb form (Tenses)
a. Overall distribution
Verb form, here, covers the morpho-syntactic variations of the verb according to time-reference, modality or voice.
64
The concept of punctual events is a difficult one, involving a definition of time as duration. The epistemology of
duration, in ontogenetic or phylogenetic terms, is even more difficult than that of time-sequence, and is linked with
that of movement. Aristotle had also sensed that. Space, time or movement can all be axiomatic.
65
The cook and the dinner are cooking at the same time, but only the dinner will be "cooked", or "have been cooked"
although if the chore was too heavy the cook may say: "I am done".
66
This is just a suggestion, until extensive surveys of the previous periods have been made.
67
Instead of saying "I am done", which is ambiguous but stresses the effect on the agent, more clearly now than in
early 19th century English, the cook might now use a have perfect. I have been doing it, I have been cooking all
morning, are just the new ways of emphasizing the involvement of the agent as well as that of the "patient" in the
result just obtained and the effect on the agent as well. Everything we did can be said to have affected us: "L'homme
est fils de ses oeuvres"[man is the son of his works].
49
Whenever the progressive is summarily evoked, present-tense quotations inevitably appear. This involves a risk due
to the polysemy, and occasional ambiguity of the present (momentary, extended, timeless, etc.) so that it is certainly
advisable to consider the past tense in the first approach.68 Many analysts have also paid special attention to the
perfect, the counterpart of the progressive in the aspectual system.
It is obvious that the density of progressives varies with the morphological classes of the verb : infinitives, of
different forms and meanings ( I expect to be talking with you, Coleridge, 1825 ; I am miserable unless I be soaring
in the empyrean, Carlyle, 1823), participles ( I write shortly, having been working my head off , Dickens, 1852),
imperatives ( Now, dear child, don't be playing pranks and shocking people, Eliot 185269), passives, and modal
expressions ( If he must be reviewing, there is my speech about the West Indies, Macaulay, 1850), are much less
common than present, past and perfect progressive forms.
The framework for this part of the study is unsophisticated. Classes expected to contain few occurrences have not
been subdivided, since the quotations, for passives and even modals, etc. can be studied individually.
It was found that percentages were the most significant measures of the comparative development of the main tense
forms (Figure 25 ). Considered separately from other factors, they must be examined with a critical eye, for various
reasons :
1. The scale is different from one “ tense ” to another, and the validity of the curve varies accordingly, even if we
posit a normal distribution ;
2. The distribution (of present and past for example) is closely associated with subject-matter and type of discourse,
narrative or argumentative, descriptive, etc. ;
3. As noted above, the present tense is versatile. This again is connected with the topic ;
4. The use of the “ tenses ” will become more significant with at least a bidimensional study, involving in particular
the dimension of semantic classes : see (b) below.
With those reservations, what can be said of the observed distribution ? Just as for predication classes, some of the
small-sized conjugational forms seem to be on the increase. This is particularly true of the passive : Figure 26. The
progressive passive was gradually substituted for the ancient form which however was still in use at the end of the
period. The point will be further illustrated in IV.1.
With the infinitive, the picture is less clear : its use, interesting in itself with its different forms and meanings, is
even more exceptional than that of the passive, making a statistical evaluation difficult. The same applies even more
to the imperative.
The use with all modal auxiliaries, contrary to expectation, does not show very significant increase, which requires
further analysis, since they are a hetereogenous group, containing, among other forms, those referring to the future :
see IV.8.
One of the interesting hints of Figure 25 is that the percentage of the perfect was diminishing. Just as in the case of
bounded predications (see also b. below), this suggests that it is due to challenging new extensions. As to the
pluperfect, the figures are too small to be really significant.
68
69
Strang 1982 underlines this too.
Negative, with the exception of some by Carlyle : . Up Jack ! up and be doing what thou canst !. 1824 Scotticism ?
50
b. Perfect and processes
The hypothesis that, parallel to the decline of be perfects with intransitives, or more generally unbounded processes,
the perfect progressive behaved differently with those types, has been tested for the two diachronic groups A and B.
This is not a truly longitudinal study, but here are the results :
Table 3
Processes and perfect
Unbounded
Perct
A
B
30
Bounded
33
30/33
7,36% 0,85%
8,54% 0,40%
31
32
31/32
8,21% 2,45% 1,14% 3,59%
8,94% 2,49% 0,60% 3,09%
In terms of percentage of the total predications in the progressive, we can see that there is a slight increase of
unbounded processes with group B, implying a relative decrease of bounded processes. This is what was expected,
although the figures are not considerably different.
Considered in term of densities in the two groups, we get the following :
Unbounded
Classes
Density A
Density B
30
12
26
33
1
1
30/33
13
28
Bounded
31
4
8
32
2
2
31/32
6
10
This confirms that the increase of perfects with unbounded predications between the two chronological groups is
probably greater than with bounded verbs : their density is more than doubled, whereas for the total of bounded
predicates it passes only from 6 to 10.
II.2.3. Development across the lexicon
Nearly 2000 lexical verbs are represented in our corpus. Their frequency of occurrence varies considerably : the
most common are go (2000 occurrences approximately), write (1036) come (867). 1766 items are present less than
10 times, and 1034 only once (hapaxes). It is probably better to avoid the term of “ lexical diffusion ” since we have
to do here with a type of conditioning very different from what was connected with the neo-grammarian controversy
(Wang 1977, Labov, 1981). As we have seen in section I.3, the main problem here is not, contrary to what can be
supposed, the listing of verbs with their appropriate distribution into the relevant sets. Given the rough
approximation we are aiming at, this is not an insurmountable task. The main difficulty is that we are dealing with a
form which is situation-bound, and situations of speech − here, mostly with reference to topics− are of a great
variety. Students of lexico-statistics have demonstrated that the vocabulary of a text increases with its length. As
has long been known, some words have a high degree of frequency and stability because they are athematic, used in
a variety of situations. This is true of state verbs of the different subclasses. A typical case is be itself : it was
excluded from the binary study in Arnaud 1973 because it is extremely rare at the progressive whereas its frequency
in the simple form implied a considerable wasting of time and effort. But there are other verbs commonly used in
many situations and present at the progressive from the very beginning of the period : verbs like do − with a large
spectre of meanings and collocations −, or make, or locative and movement verbs. The curve of their density
increase (not presented here) can be shown to parallel the general curve for their predication class.
But thematic verbs, verbs associated to a given topic, especially with our great writers who mastered a large lexicon,
have a tendency to appear erratically, according to need or even fancy. Grouping them into classes duplicates the
51
observations of the semantic study above. The other way of looking at it is to order them in frequency lists, with the
perhaps risky hypothesis that, if the verbs of low frequency at a given period are more numerous than verbs of the
same frequency level at the previous period, this means that the diffusion affects preferably the class of verbs to
which these low frequency tokens belong.
It seems sensible not to separate hapaxes (frequency 1 in a given lot) and verbs of frequency 2 or 3. When people
use a new verb in a given situation, they are tempted to use it again, sometimes at little distance from the first, by
“ contagion ” as statisticians also say.
A curve of frequency distributions for individual verb tokens has been drawn for groups A and B (corresponding
roughly to the two successive “ generations ” of writers) : it takes the familiar hyperbolic form of vocabulary
frequency distributions : Figure 27.
Apparently the distribution is very similar in both chronological groups. This tends to show that the choice of the
progressive has little or no influence on the selection of vocabulary, or that the choice of vocabulary at a given point
is made independently.
For the various strata (correspondence, murder trials, dialogue in novels, novels, and selections from Punch (18401870) in the previous binary study (Arnaud 1973) such curves had been drawn for both simple and progressive forms
of equal samples of 1000 occurrences : they showed no clear difference between the frequency distributions of the
two forms, which would support the suggestion above.
For a very significant study of this point, a knowledge of the rules of vocabulary increase applied to the corpus
considered would certainly be helpful. We have already noted that new verbs, neologisms, nonce-words or backformations are commonly found at the progressive form, as if two novelties (so long as the progressive was still felt
as a novelty) were attracting each other. Here is a short list of back-formations found in our corpus in progressive
verb-forms : new roof (Dorothy Wordsworth), house hunt (Thackeray and others), holiday make (Dickens) picture
see (Thackeray) quill drive (Thackeray), sight see (Thackeray) wool gather (Thackeray), gaslight (Ruskin),
daguerreotype (Ruskin). They seem to be more frequent with the second generation.
It does not seem likely that the choice of the participant in the process, giving the first element in the compound
(often the “ patient ”, but also “ instrument ” or even something else) which is important for the transformational
analysis, accounts for this transfer from gerundial forms to progressives. The rapid introduction of the progressive
with those new verbs would rather add a stone to the theories of Gabriel de Tarde 1895 on imitation, or simply to the
neo-grammarian secondary rule of analogy. 70 It is well-known that, in modern French, all new verbs take the -er
conjugation, the more modern type : zapper, booster, to quote recent anglicisms, from zapping, boosting. Yet,
besides the idea of novelty, another motive, probably stronger, is that these new forms (sometimes nonce-words as
they are aptly called although many have survived ) have a strong component of immediacy, are usually strongly
situated.
Provisionally at least, we will then have to admit that the neogrammarian rule is working in this case : the change
affects (virtually) the whole lexical system at once. But, whereas only a short length of text, oral or written, is
necessary to encounter practically all phonemes, the dictionary of verbs is far from being explored even with 10
million words of written text. Even a few verbs of the small classes 1 to 4 (states) not yet found in the corpus can
turn up unexpectedly in a letter : beseech (Dickens), justify (Dickens), exhort (Eliot), prescribe (Gaskell), etc. Their
rarity as tokens parallels the small number of lexical items in the class as a whole.
III.2.4. Person
On a total of 21 777 occurrences, 8937 are at the first person (41 per cent) and 8947 at the second : so that first plus
second persons represent nearly half of the total number. This could easily be surmised. If we add to this the
probable number of third person utterances referring to human subjects, it is easy to see that, in this type of discourse
especially, the progressive is overwhelmingly a form concerning people, and largely in dialogic situations. It is not
suprising then that studies have consistently overlooked the other cases. But that the progressive is fundamentally a
subjective form is undeniable : Cf. Ota (1963 : 73 sq.) ,who studies what he calls I/you verbs. This is however too
vague a concept and it requires further definition : see General conclusion.
70
It does not take a big leap to pass from a gerund or verbal noun to a progressive. However, it is not certain that the
verb was introduced first in the progressive: the O.E.D. gives the simple form as the original attested one; but this is
only in texts, and often literary texts. Nothing to support this precedence of the simple form has been observed in
our corpus, closer to ordinary speech.
52
III.3.
Sociolinguistic factors
III.3.1. Men and women :
The first dimension available for study was the gender dimension, with the traditional query : is there a difference
between women and men in receptivity to the progressive ? Several techniques have been used to assess the
comparative densities, relying on the convergence of the results.
III.3.1.a. Overall densities for the whole period :
Women : 247
Men : 211
III.3.1.b. Extremes:
Highest density
Women : 358 (Gaskell)
Men : 334 (Thackeray)
Lowest density
Women : 157 (Hutchinson)
Men : 107 (Coleridge)
These figures also point to the extremes of the diachronic curve showing the total output of individual writers (Fig. 4
& 5).
III.3.1.c. Diachronic groups :
The two diachronic groups already studied for their total densities in III.1.2., can also be referred to for a comparison
of men and women.
TABLE 4
Group A : THE EARLY ROMANTICS
Women
Words: 1 435 000
PF: 2621
D: 183
Men
Words: 3 023 000
PF: 4430
D: 147
Group B : THE LATER ROMANTICS
Women
Words: 1 824 000
PF: 5443
D: 298
Men
53
Words: 1 900 000
PF: 5388
D: 281
In both groups, the density for women is higher. The contribution of women to group A, however, is only half that
of men for the same age-group. This makes the comparison a little less reliable.
III.3.1.d. Pairs :
The comparison can be supplemented by selecting people of the same generation supposed to share the same
linguistic environment and possibly the same values.
1. EARLY ROMANTICS :
Men
Wm Wordsworth :144
Coleridge : 107
Women
Mary Wordsworth : 266
Sara Hutchinson : 157
2. LATER ROMANTICS :
Men
Dickens : 274
Thackeray : 334
Women
Mrs Gaskell : 358
George Eliot : 344
NB. The pairs of the first generation are indeed couples, since there was a love-affair between Coleridge and Sara
Hutchinson. Yet, they met only at intervals and could hardly have influenced each other in this respect. There are
two exceptions to the rule : Southey, with a density of 176, is nearly on the same level as the average for women of
his age-group, and J.J. Ruskin (179) shows a higher density than his wife Margaret (158) : but for the latter two, the
corpus size is too small to be relied on.
All attempts to connect the higher density consistently exhibited by women to other factors commonly suggested : −
choice of topics (see for ex. Kipers 1987), semantics of verbs, preference for the first or second person, etc. − have
failed. The difference between the figures is sometimes not very great, yet it seems difficult not to recognize that, for
the population considered, women are definitely ahead of men in their use of the progressive. 71 A possible
explanation for that difference will be suggested below. Two remarks may be in point : 1. It is unfortunate that we
have so little information about children. The early letters of Thackeray and of John Ruskin which have been
preserved are too few to be significant ; yet they show that children were addicted to the new forms − was it due to
their being exposed to the language of women, often also of lower-class girls, their nurses, sometimes Irish ? 2. The
high densities exhibited by Jane Austen both in her letters and in her novels have been considered in the idiolects
section, III.1.4. They may also afford a clue.
III.3.2. Degrees of intimacy.72
As exposed in I.3. b, degrees of intimacy are often hard to distinguish. Once more, we rely on the convergence of
the results to form a clear idea of the weight of this factor. With a certain number of our letter-writers, it would not
be significant to try to differentiate degrees, either because we have no basis for a justified choice, in which cases −
Keats, Edgeworth − degree 2 has been taken as the average degree of intimacy. or because nearly all the letters
published were addressed to family or close friends − Mary Wordsworth, Jane Austen, the Ruskins, and even Jane
Welsh-Carlyle, who had few correspondents outside the intimate circle.
The results can be computed for the whole corpus, for groups, and for individuals.
III.3.2.a. For the whole corpus
71
This does not mean that being fond of the progressive (with its ambiguous name) is a quality, or that being
conservative is a defect. Evaluation is a different sort of problem, first for the general community, and for the sociohistorical student of the resistance to change.
72
See list of correspondents according to intimacy in the ANNEX.
54
TABLE 5
Densities for the 3 degrees of intimacy
Degrees
Men Women Difference
1
2
3
253
193
136
270
241
191
17
48
55
The results are clear : women are ahead of men for all degrees of intimacy. It must be recalled that degrees were
selected before the count was made : they could possibly be disputed in some cases on the basis of biographical
evidence, but can the consistency of the results, even when differences are not considerable, be due to chance ?
III.3.2.b. Diachronic groups :
For group A, where Dorothy Wordsworth has been included, since she had been omitted from the general count in
III.1.2. only for the sake of equilibrating the groups, it may be useful to give two sets of figures :
• with the elimination of Edgeworth and Keats ( for whom no significant degrees were observed) :
General density : 151
Density Intimacy 1 : 182
• with the elimination of writers with only degree 1 of intimacy :
General density : 143
Density Intimacy 1 : 177
For group B, eliminating writers whose intimate letters are difficult to distinguish ( Robert and E.B.-Browning) or
who were almost always writing to intimate correspondents (Jane Welsh, Mrs Gaskell, Ruskin) we get the following
results for the added outputs of Eliot, Macaulay, Thackeray and Dickens :
Density Intimacy 1 : 322
Density Intimacy 2 : 310
Density Intimacy 3 : 204
General density
: 291
Considering the possibility of bias due to different sample sizes and disputable allocation of intimacy degrees, the
differences may not seem considerable. It is however clear that there is a wide gap between Int. 1 and 3 (more than
100), though the corpus for degree 3 is noticeably smaller and consequently less reliable. 73 Between Intimacy 1 and
2 the figures are not much apart. In fact, when we consider individual writers, we see that Macaulay and Dickens are
reversing the difference :
Macaulay
D1 : 235
D2 : 306
Dickens
D1 : 268
D2 : 318
In Macaulay’s case, this is possibly due to the comparative restraint noticeable in his letters to his parents, whereas in
Dickens’s letters, the ascription of degrees 1 and 2 may be responsible and/or the choice of topic may have more
influence than intimacy with the addressee.
We don’t claim more than the observation of a tendency. Closer analysis would be necessary to give more precision
to the notion of intimacy. Then, the measurement of density is a very rough approximation. It happens however that
only when satellites could explore them from a great distance were some features of the earth’s surface seen for the
first time. Again what is encouraging is that there are few exceptions to the general trend. Another encouragement
73
On the other hand, it has always been easy to locate the letters addressed to strangers or implying distance.
55
is that, apart from private correspondence, the density of progressives varies in all texts along a formality scale
(Arnaud 1973, Smitterberg 1999, 2002).74 The section on literature below will consider some of the reasons for this,
just as the study of individual trajectories in III.1.4.b, and the role of women. Convergence is again the key word
74
Formality is no more than a rough and ready approximation: consideration of "genres" (Biber & Finegan 1997,
Smitterberg 1999, 2002) is now giving more substantial insights into the variety of language use.
56
CHAPTER FOUR
FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS
The informations presented under this title concern the linguistic conditionings and constraints of the development of
the progressive and can also be seen as a synchronic picture for the period : a collection of individual observations
as well as indications of general tendencies. Many of them confirm recognized assumptions, quantifying and
illustrating them ; others may occasionally challenge them. Here again, we are relying rather on the convergence of
the results and what is commonly admitted than on statistical estimates. It would be beyond the scope of the present
work to attempt a detailed linguistic analysis of often-debated questions for which it simply aims at providing
material.
IV. 1. The development of the passive (Figure 26) :
The reasons for this development and the rise of the progressive passive will not be discussed here : see e.g. Warner
1995, 1997 ; Denison, 1998; Nakamura, 1998; Smitterberg, 2002.
At the end of the 18th century, the old “ symmetric ” progressive with passive force (the house is building can be seen
as a reversal of someone is building the house) was still the only one to be used. It gradually gave way to the new
form in be-ing : the house is being built. Some relics are found today : the dinner is cooking, Hamlet is playing. We
take it for granted now that : the bell is ringing is not a passive, because the agent is not explicit ; yet, compare :
Galatian [the hymn] is singing in the hall with a large troop of boys (Scott, 1829, 88). This could be the case with
several verbs used transitively or intransitively. The door was opening, the eggs are boiling, are not so far from 19th
century phrases such as : While the horses were changing I happened ... to run up a street (Ruskin, 1845, 13) or : My
third boy... is educating expressly for engineers or artillery, ( Dickens, 1862, 3) ; “ O my eye ! Stop thief ! I am
strangling ” (Dickens, Our Mutual Friend) ; Lenchen came in with a telegram while I was dressing (Queen
Victoria) : a queen does not dress without help, nor is it certain that Jane Austen did her hair alone : I have not seen
them yet− as my hair was dressing when the Man and Stockgs came (Austen, 1813, 30). This is largely a matter of
the agentive system we have at the back of our minds and anachronisms are always a risk. We are supposed not to
be animists and yet many of our agentless expressions suggest some concealed agent. This is especially the case
with social phenomena : taxes are increasing, augmenting. A force was collecting at Bridport was a normal
expression for Macaulay ; cf. also gathering. All this refers us to the history of the middle-voice and the activepassive development in Indo-European languages. In many cases, the concept of “ squish ”(Cf. Bailey & Shuy
1973 : 62-140) could be helpful here, since there is some variability in the constraints and the passive category is not
homogeneous : e.g. the bell was ringing / bells ring ; the novel is selling / novels sell (well) ; a sirloin was roasting
/ ?*sirloins roast ; our woollens are washing/ ? woollens don’t wash ; baby is washing/ * babies wash.
As shown in Figure 26, the new passive was adopted by many of our letter-writers from the beginning, 75 but only
occasionally. The figures for densities by decades, adjusted to facilitate comparison with the overall increase,
illustrate convergence of the observations.76 They display a crossing of the curves by 1840. Small as the figures are,
they undeniably show that our letter-writers accompanied the development. This sudden acceptance after a period of
latency when the literate community was more than reticent, sheds some light on the way linguistics barriers are
overthrown under the pressure of external forces, and perhaps not differently from other sociological barriers. This
must apply to fashion for example such as hemline adjustment or hair-style, but also to more socially important
behaviour : the way unmarried couples have become accepted by their own families, etc. Why, for example, so
many speeches, in the House of Commons or elsewhere, so many newspaper articles, so many words indeed, had to
be said, before the mere idea of democracy was accepted in Britain ? 77 It takes a long time before a
75
It is only recently that instances of the passive have been found earlier than the well-known quotation from
Southey's letters ( Warner 1995, Denison 1998, Nakamura 1998).
76
A computation of percentages has also been made: it is so similar to the density curve that it is not presented here.
77
Coleridge, Southey and Wordsworth (cf. his Prelude, begun in 1799) had accepted it in their young years; in
1867, Disraeli was still opposed to the word and the idea: We do not, however, live − and I trust will never live
57
psychosociological current running underground, suddenly erupts, soon to be aknowledged as if it had always been
so. We may suggest that linguistic progress happens in two opposite manners, with possibly some intermediate
cases :
1. When the change is not conscious, or not clearly so, the development is slow and gradual ;
2. When the item considered is stigmatized, systematically shunned by the leaders of linguistic opinion (see below
about Macaulay), the development supported by both internal and external forces, is long contained and suddenly
bursts off, as when the gate of a castle is forced − by barbarians as some people will still say ; many such barbarisms
became the new rule.
Some of the old passives are still in common use at present : sell, cook, play (speaking of a theatre-play ; Dickens
also uses act). But even the notorious build is found as late as 1857, in Macaulay’s letters, but also with Mrs
Gaskell (1851), Dickens (1844,1854) and J. Ruskin (1845). Among his generation, Dickens seems to have been one
of the most faithful to it : in his letters we find 24 occurrences of the old form not normally used today, but there are
also 18 progressive passives including one for play (theatre) : Nothing is being played here scarcely that is not
founded on my books, 1867.
After the fifties, John Ruskin and Mrs Gaskell are the only ones where we find the old forms, occasionally.
According to his biographer G. Trevelyan, Macaulay censured the new passive (Mossé 1938 : 157) ; and yet, Mossé
found two cases in his early letters; there are 6 in fact, but not a single one after 1834 : youthful sins !
Since Macaulay is a notorious case of faithfulness to the old usage, the passives found in his letters are an interesting
example of the development :
1815 I suppose we may expect his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, as the Pavilion is now being repaired and
done up.
1819 The Poem is being finally struck off.
1826 But to carry a letter of introduction, to wait in the outer room while it is being read...
1830 The Members of Parliament are being sworn in again.
1834 All the Edinburgh Reviews are being bound.
1852 and my first lunch is preparing.
Was ever anything so lucky as Denison’s letter coming just when the cry of Puseyism was setting up against the new
Ministry ? (a dubious example perhaps).
1855 I am thinking more of the state of the currency and the bank in 1696 than of what is doing in the City at
present.
1857 Lord Panmure has asked me to write an inscription for a column which is building at Scutari.
Born in 1800, Macaulay was 34 when he used the modern form for the last time in his letters, and in an expression
where the old form still survives today. After that, just as in his historical works, he seems to have deliberately
reacted.
Only one case has been found when the agent was expressed, in a letter by Jane Austen :
our garden is putting in order by a Man who bears a remarkable good character (1807) ;
−under a democracy; 18 March 1867, in his speech on the famous night when he and Gladstone were confronted on
the issue of the Second Parliamentary Reform. Cf. Raymond Williams, Keywords p. 85.
58
Another, in Mansfield Park, is quoted by Jespersen III 1935 : 352 :
the baize was actually forming into a curtain by the housemaids.
There are very few cases like that, where the passive force is explicited clearly. Mossé 1938 gives an older example
by Walpole :
it is there the the search must be making by Manfred and the strangers;
and another by Dickens :
my cup of tea which was then preparing by Mary Jane.
Lindley Murray 1795 suggests the following, probably of his own making :
the Indian was burning by the cruelty of his enemies ;
the youth was consuming by a slow malady.
Two cases where the agentive nature of the subject is dubious : the distinction between agent and cause is
notoriously difficult.
IV. 2. The extended present :
This label covers the use of the progressive when the context makes it clear that the time-reference is situated either
after the moment of speaking (with a present or a past tense-form) or before it (with a perfect or pluperfect tenseform). The most common way of stressing this immediacy is just, whatever the orientation.
Curiously, grammarians have been mostly interested with the near-future reference, as in the following (with just as a
typical adverb, which often looks like a mere expletive) :
I am just going down to Lord Aberdeen (Scott, 1807) ;
I am just setting off for Sundridge (W. Wordsworth, 1818) ;
she is just going to Paris for a week or two (R. Browning, 1870).
In the other case, the present relevance is commonly referred to the perfect, not to the progressive itself :
Caroline, Anna and I have just been devouring some cold souse (Austen, 1796) ;
Mrs Robberds’s son-in-law has just been having the small-pox (Gaskell, 1865) ;
Anny and I had been talking about you just before and she had been telling me how my stepfather ... would say to
them ...(Thackeray, 1853).
In 19th century usage, there is some symmetry between the two, with the utterance point as a sort of magnet.
252 cases of near-future reference have been found, to which can be added 23 cases where the utterance point is in
the past.
The curve (Figure 28) is ascending first, but then depressed. This may be due to chance, but there may be another
reason : it is well-known that, in modern English, three expressions are in competition with the progressive for nearfuture reference, with different connotations. The plain simple form, involving usually an idea of prearranged plan,
is reserved to a limited number of “ perfunctory ” cases : it certainly was far more widespread in 1800 than it is now.
The be-to form, so common with Jane Austen : it is seldom used nowadays and must have been fairly rapidly on the
wane, especially when no idea of constraint or compulsion was associated to it. Then, we have the going to
expressions : no count was taken of them for this research.
59
On this account some impressions must be mentioned :
.
1.
Going to was sometimes in competition with coming to78
2.
The going to form seems to have developed after the plain progressive alone had taken that “ intentional ”
value. This may be the reason why the latter’s development shows an abrupt decrease by the fifties (periods 12-13),
since even today in current practice the two are not always clearly differentiated. We wouldn’t say : we are going to
go to the seaside tomorrow, very willingly, so we are going to the seaside will be preferred. Go, come, and other
verbs of movement are the most commonly used with extended present meaning. With our letter-writers, we also
often find write (with future reference mostly) and read (with past reference mostly). The decrease may also just be
due to chance or idiosyncratic preference.
IV.3.
Time-frame
Jespersen’s theory of the progressive as forming a “ time-frame ” for another event is well-known. The prolific and
richly documented grammarian has long exerted a considerable influence, and he maintained his views as long as he
lived. He claimed he had the idea in 1914, and its expression is fully developed in his Modern English Grammar on
Historical Principles of 1931, Part IV : 178.
He gives the following diagrams :
he is writing
he was writing
(now)
when I entered
he is writing
(he has begun writing)
now
(he has not stopped writing)
he was writing
the moment
(he had begun writing)
of my entering
(he had not stopped writing)
And he explains : “ The essential thing is that the action or state denoted by the expanded tense [i.e. the progressive
form] is thought of as a temporal frame encompassing something else which as often as not is to be understood from
the whole situation. ” This last remark was kept in mind when computing the occurrences of the progressive, but one
has to trust the researcher for judging the situation from the context.
1,230 progressives were found, out of some 21,800, satisfying Jespersen’s description more or less, that is between 5
and 6 per cent only.
If we remember Bain’s remark that the “ agent is now engrossed, and is barred from other occupation ”, we may
have a very general view of the case. Certainly, speaking of people or of things as well, there is always something
“ going on ” − “ goings-on ” is the neutral characterisation of the progressive suggested by Leech 1971 : 14, who also
mentions its use for a temporal frame, p. 17 −, so that any “ situation, happening or going-on ”, to quote Leech again,
inevitably follows something that precedes and precedes what follows 79 , and even what precedes may be going on
77
This metaphoric use of verbs of movement, sometimes with curious redundancy, is well-known and not limited to
English: cf. French nous allons partir. When the context implies movement, it can be difficult to discriminate
metaphor from ordinary sense.
79
The original aspectual significance of the progressive could be illustrated by the saying, famous in France,
concerning Monsieur de la Palisse, a legendary knight, who fought in Italy with king François I :
Monsieur de la Palisse est mort
Il est mort devant Pavie;
Un quart d'heure avant sa mort
Il était encore en vie.
60
at the same time as the subject is engaged in the new occupation referred to by the progressive, a point that Bain
overlooked. Taken in this sense, Jespersen’s statement can be seen as just another way of emphasizing the
existential meaning of the progressive − the condition of the subject in a spatio-temporal frame (see I.2. above) − in
the “ stream of events ” paralleling William James’s “ stream of consciousness ”. We can see that a more specific
description explicitely implying simultaneity covers only a limited number of situations. 80
IV.4.
Bounded intervals of time :
One of the perversities of corpus-oriented linguists is to look for cases belying some of the accepted rules of schoolgrammars or even of more sophisticated analysts. Most grammarians have always been cautious with the limitations
of the progressive, whether it concerned the lexicon or the contextual or situational factors, but it has sometimes been
said or implied that explicitly limited duration would be in contradiction with the imperfective meaning of the
progressive81 : one of the common views, mostly founded on present or perfect tense examples, is that the timeinterval when the predication is valid cannot be bounded, at least in present-day English 82 whereas the simple form
is synoptic, hence encompassing both ends of the interval.
Explicit measurement of the time-interval has been found in about 200 cases in our corpus.83 Does this imply that
this interval is bounded ? Certainly not. The usual context where we find such expressions is of the type :
I have been writing for two hours.
As we know, the perfect in this case is quite in accordance with continuation of the activity, occupation or state of
things, and this will be true with the past perfect when it is a present perfect translated into the past.
The vast majority of our examples ( nearly two thirds) are plain present or past perfects, to which we should add
some indirect cases such as :
Your invaluable packet ... having all this time been lying at the post off ( Mary Wordsworth, 1839) .
Uncertainties about the real time-span sometimes occur. When Dorothy Wordsworth writes :
Mr and Mrs Cooke have been spending a month at Ambleside (D. Wordsworth, 1803),
this is uncommittal : the month may or may not be ended. This is a familiar point when one studies the perfect and
its “ present relevance ”, further emphasized by the progressive.
The remaining 70 cases when the time-limit is explicitely mentioned are more challenging. On this point, Leech
1971 : 16, makes interesting remarks. About :
I was reading from 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. / I read from 10 to 11 p.m.
M. de la Palisse is dead. He died at Pavia. A quarter of an hour before his death, he was still living (alive). Les
vérités de la Palisse are that sort of statements, said to be so incontrovertible that they seem stupid.
80
The same encompassing value has been observed with the French imparfait. Cf. Imbs 1960: 90-1, who speaks of
"fond de décor": Le garagiste la rattrapa au vol et la remit sur pied. Pablo criait et pleurait (Sartre); On l'a tuée ?
demanda-t-elle, comme Maigret s'asseyait près de la fenêtre (Siménon).
81
E.g. R.L. Allen 1966: 220, who compares what he calls "suffusive" and overlapping predications; Leech 1971: 17;
Buyssens 1968: 156, 166.
82
A comprehensive examination of the adverbials used with progressives can be found in Scheffer 1975: 50-53. In
his corpus, adverbials denoting restricted duration, answering the question "how long?", represent 18.7 % of all
adverbials. Scheffer refers us to Diver 1963: 148-9 for a criticism of the ambiguities of the term "limitation". Cf.
also Joos 1964 and his "limitation of the validity of the predication", supposed to be diminishing gradually as time
goes on (p. 107, 112). He calls the progressive the "temporary aspect", and says, about examples like "Am I really
hearing what you are saying ?": I propose that this means, or rather its use of the temporary aspect means:
Assuming that the predication is valid for the time principally referred to, then it is 99 per cent probably valid. for
certain slightly earlier and late times, it is 96 per cent probably valid for times earlier and later by somewhat more
than that, and so on until the probability of its validity has diminished to zero.
83
Buyssens 1968: 156 sq. gives a long list of modern quotations on this point. He concludes that the progressive
unsually underlines that the span of time was longer than normally expected and that its end is coming.
61
he writes : The Simple Past tells us that the speaker started to read at 10 o’clock and finished at 11 o’clock. The
Progressive, however, does not specify either the time of beginning or the time of completing the activity : all we
know is that reading was in progress for that hour. Hence it would be a fitting answer from a suspect being
interrogated by a detective. The detective would ask What WERE you DOING between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m. ? being
uninterested in whether the activity persisted after that period or not ; and the suspect would reply in kind.
This can be referred to the analysis attempted in I.2. of the semantics of the progressive and to I.3.2. on the situation
of utterance, at least when animate-human subjects are considered. The aspectual value in terms of boundaries is
superseded or overshadowed by the adjectival value of temporary occupation. Boundaries are not entirely irrelevant
as when the synoptic simple form is used, but they are overlooked, or implicitly flexible.84 The analogy with
temporary state adjectives would be instructive in this case :
She was asleep from 10 p.m. till 10 a.m. ;
Her telephone was busy for two hours ;
We were all glad of his success until we learned that he had been disqualified, etc.
But :
? We were all enjoying his success until...
Until and till may reasonably be said to set a time-limit to the predication.
Sometimes, it can be said that until opens a new time-span instead of closing the previous one85 :
Your book, I imagine, is being reserved until the right time for advertising school books. [ i-e. comes ]( Eliot ,1863).
But even this example, in the passive, defines a clear and “ punctual ” time-limit and most if not all seem to do so,
thus closing the prospect. The example given by Leech was in the past tense, but many in our corpus are in the
present . They mostly concern locative verbs :
We are staying at Boulogne until the 10th of October( Dickens, 1853) ;
Do you understand that I am stopping here till Saturday morning 11 o’clock (Gaskell, 1860).
Yet we also find :
but till then I am delivering a course of extempore lectures which (Carlyle, 1838) ;
I am saving up the perusal of Vanity Fair until I have done Dombey. (Dickens, 1848).
In the past, more common, we find :
I was gambling until 2 o’clock this morning ( Thackeray, 1851).
There are many cases when only the length of the time-interval suggests its limitation. Again, locative verbs are the
most common :
Mrs Somerville and I were sitting on the opposite sofa all night (Edgeworth, 1822) ;
but we also find :
I was for several hours passing through a succession of spots which ... (Macaulay, 1834).
On Wednesday I was riding for 12 hours canvassing rather a feat for me (Thackeray, 1832).
In the following :
From the moment we came till we left them Mr & Mrs Fowler were contriving and executing sthg for our amusement
(Edgeworth, 1821),
the time-limits are clearly defined.
84
85
Or Culioli's "open boundaries" (Cf. Groussier & Rivière 1996, s.v.)
In oral speech, there may be a pause before until and/or an intonation and stress signal.
62
The present tense is not unusual :
I am writing by the river-side for a few days (Dickens, 1857).
I am writing at the Reform Club until 4 o’clock when I have an ingaygement [sic] with such a charming person
(Thackeray, 1849).
In some cases, the sentence has iterative meaning, so that it can be said that the time-limits are included in the
predication, not just a secondary piece of information :
They are paving, repairing, gaslighting, drumming, from morning till night (John Ruskin, 1845).
What Ruskin is complaining of is not that they are paving etc., but that they do it all day long. This type of sentence
seems to be perfectly acceptable to-day. But perhaps less so the following, also iterative :
Father is driving at fine speed from 8 o c till 12 at night (Mary Wordsworth, 1839).
Remember that we have no way of checking whether Mary Wordsworth’s sentence was entirely acceptable in her
time. But this is one instance of the usual type :
What are you doing these days ?
Where one may reply : I am idling from morning to night.
Obviously, the question of time-boundaries requires special attention when bounded movement predications (class
21) or bounded processes (class 31) are considered. This has been the subject of discussions, especially by Bennett
and Partee 1972, Dowty 1977 and Vlach 1981a and b, in attempts to formalize tense and aspect in English along the
lines of Montague’s Formal philosophy 1974 , also called Montague grammar. The logical concept of truth-value is
not entirely adequate for the task, since for example it led Dowty to assume that there are no progressives of
achievement sentences. Again, we will be satisfied with examining the few cases when the whole predication reads
like an achievement.
Still, I am getting worried a little, because I was all day long getting from Milan to Baveno (John Ruskin).
This is definitely a terminative movement predication. It was first tentatively included among progressives in our
corpus probably because of the adverbial all day LONG , instead of simply all day. Yet it is at least a borderline
case, and for want of the support of stress, pause and intonation signals it would have in oral speech, there is some
ground for not considering it as a true progressive. The sense is clear : it took me a whole day to go from Milan to
Baveno ; getting from M. to B. took me a whole day . And the reordering :
• I was getting from Milan to Baveno all day long
would have been, probably, an unacceptable sentence, supposing that the one written by Ruskin was entirely
acceptable. We have here one of those intermediate structures which, according to some historians, led to the
development of the modern form.
63
From the moment we came till we left them Mr & Mrs Fowler were contriving and executing sthg for our amusement
(Edgeworth, 1821) ;
On Saturday I was correcting proofs literally from morning till night (Eliot, 1853).
The two sentences above are not strictly identical. In the second, the predicate is clearly to be analyzed as correctproof (cf. the nominalization proof-correcting). One could say that the progressive solves the ambiguity of the
determinacy of proofs, by giving it a notional, or generic value (Cf. Leech, 1969 : 151).
With Maria Edgeworth’s sentence, the situation is more embarrassing, but it is not unreasonable to say that
something suggests indeterminacy and leads to a similar interpretation of the predicate as contrive-something,
execute-something.
There is another girl ...to whom we are giving a few shillings now and then ... until we are ready to take her
(Dickens, 1847).
Give is a bounded process, but repetition, in spite of the mention of the − somewhat indefinite − sum, tends to
iterative-generic meaning, thus allowing use of the progressive (see below IV.5).
Your book, I imagine, is being reserved until the right time for advertising school books (Eliot, 1863).
Aside from the fact, mentioned above, that until is less of an enclosure than it seems, this passive form may be one of
George Eliot’s idiosyncracies. The old form of the passive (*is reserving) was not acceptable ; 86 so instead of using
an “ impersonal ” active form : they are reserving your book, she may have used this curious passive as a sort of
understatement, although not being herself the publisher who was delaying the issue.
Our conclusion, then, must be that the supporters of Montague grammar are right in this respect : explicitely
bounded achievement sentences were as difficult to use in 19th century English as at present. Time-limits were
possible with unbounded processes only, or iterated or generalized bounded ones.
86
No inventory of the limitations of that older passive form seems to have been made.
64
IV.5.Generalizing progressive
A number of approximately 900 quotations (out of almost 21 800) can be ascribed to such uses of the progressive :
they have always embarrassed grammarians, who didn’t always distinguish 19th century from present-day usage.
The progressive is rightly considered as a truly actualized form, so that its use with adverbs like always for example,
seems contradictory. Recently, some logicians or linguists have noted the parallel, in this respect, of verb and noun
phrases where the definite article, for example, can assume a generalizing sense : the child is father of the man , a
famous line by Wordsworth is typically puzzling. This shifting from particular to general is sufficiently fascinating
to justify closer examination.
Such generalizing uses are ordinarily presented as secondary, and even Leech 1971, who dedicates to the point two
interesting pages, puts them under the heading “ other uses ”. Comrie,1976,37 the author of an enlightening study on
Aspect, speaks, like many others, of “ emotive effect ”.
Consideration of what happened in 19th century English may help to understand the apparent contradiction. Two
contrasting expressions, one actualized the other iterative, of fairly frequent occurrence − but probably more in the
oral than in the written language, witness the minutes of murder trials at the Assizes (Notable British Trials Series
published by William Hodge & Co.) − are worth mentioning in this respect : in the act of, and in the habit of. (see
II.4).
I am just in the act of getting done with that thrice wearisome Legendre (Carlyle 1821) ;
I am in the habit of taking my papers to Dilke (Keats 1818).
It has been found convenient to consider separately the following types :
IV.5.1. Extended situation (present or past) :
The French people, as usual, are making as much noise as possible about everything that is of no importance
(Dickens, 1850) ;
He is taking a violent medicine (Dorothy Wordsworth, 1803) ;
Tell me that you are sleeping naturally and well (Eliot, 1875).
“ In these cases, the concept of “ limited duration ” is applied not to the individual events that make up the series, but
to the series as a whole. The meaning is ‘HABIT IN EXISTENCE OVER A LIMITED PERIOD’ ” : Leech 1971 :
27-8.
This can also be applied to :
I am not going out again (Eliot, 1862) ;
I am seeing nobody (Eliot, 1879).
George Eliot is not intimating a prohibition as when a politician says to journalists : I am not answering questions 87
she is just saying that she has not resumed her old habit of going out, and the expression could be affirmative as well,
since it is constative, not at all performative.
A small number of such examples (10) has been found in the corpus.
IV.5.2. Iterated situations
Not very different from the above are subordinate clauses, usually introduced by when, in the sense of whenever In
fact, there is a gradient, leading from the particular to the universal.
87
Incidentally, this well-known use of the progressive in present-day English has not been found in our corpus. It is
not far from a performative, and the problem is whether the negation is, in logical terms, within or without the
predicate proper. Whereas: I disown you as my friend; I deny you the right to do this, are clearly performative
utterances, what about : I do not include you among my friends and I don't allow you to do this ? In: I am not
answering questions, the politician above is just setting himself a momentary line of conduct, a law applying only to
himself, not altogether very different from the "principle" followed by George Eliot.
65
When you go into her room she is lying generally as if she were in a state of insensibility ( Hutchinson, 1835) ;
she looks so pretty when she is playing on the harp ( Edgeworth, 1830) ;
some of the pleasantest time is talking with Mrs E. when we are going to bed ( Edgeworth, 1813) ;
I seem to lose twenty of my years when we are chatting together (Carlyle, 1823) ;
when I am not suffering for vicious beastliness I am the greater part of the week in spirits (Keats, 1817) ;
The reference is to iterated individual situations, whatever their number. But the meaning becomes generalized in :
I never feel more contemptible than when I am sitting by a good looking coachman ( Keats, 1819) ;
Referring to what was said in I.3.2. about the transition from punctual action to behaviour, conduct and character, we
realize here that, from the repetition of such situations, Keats comes to an appreciation of himself − he seems to have
been a handsome young man, but was at the same time insecure, and suffered from being small-sized.
With a generic subject the situation becomes a sort of prototype :
I by no means accede to the doctrine that ladies cannot attend to anything else when they are working (Edgeworth,
1805).
In Keats’s remark :
when a poor devil is drowning it is said he comes thrice to the surface (Keats, 1818),
due allowance must be made to the fact that drowning is not an instant process ; but we also find :
I cannot but feel that the Right man is always in the Right Place when he is pleasing his Par. or his Mar. (Thackeray,
1855) ;
a man, when he is courting a woman (Coleridge, 1819) ;
never to interrupt your elders while they are speaking ( Coleridge, 1807).
Even in the sense of whenever, when can also be said to provide a generalized time-frame, by iteration of individual
situations. Actually, this may correspond to different stages in the process of generalisation.
(1) Any time when you are writing, 2s/3 worth of stamps would be most acceptable (Eliot 1879) ;
(2) but mind I won’t have you to come in a whirl just when people are coming in and out of the house ( Gaskell
1859) ;
(3) remember all his advice etc. when you are practising (Gaskell 1851) ;
(4) and when you are sitting in the evening solitary and silent... then imagine...(Ruskin 1836).
There is some uncertainty concerning the above examples. Especially in (1), an interpretation is suggested of
reference to a single occasion in the (near) future ; (2) may suggest a more general recommendation, but taking its
origin from an occasional event. ; (3), since practising refers by definition to repetitive action, leads to a generalized
meaning, whereas (4) may definitely allude to regular behaviour : whenever.
No other case of reference to a single future act has been found.
When normally refers to recurrent facts, which can be seen as habits, since there is only a small step between
repeated and habitual, especially when animate subjects, or moods or states of mind are concerned. This is the
prevailing use : some 70 cases have been counted, out of 130 when-sentences, that is more than 50 %.
66
IV.5.3. Generalization
The next stage − a short step further − is generalization of an act or event considered as typical. Repetition becomes
a rule. Some 25 cases have been counted.
for it happens often that consumptive people seem to ail nothing when they are moving about in carriages (Dorothy
Wordsworth 1808) ;
You know Kerry when you are walking with a lady you should always consider...(Edgeworth 1818) ;
when any woman has been scolding, beating, or otherwise abusing one of the other sex, ...she is made to ride stang (
Gaskell 1838) ;
if men will preach just when turtle soup is coming in, what can they expect...(Macaulay 1831) ;
when a man is drawing or working in any way, for other people, he has always a hope that... (Ruskin 1852) ;
he asked whether dead people ever dreamed while they were lying in the ground (Dickens 1846) ;
It is so much a custom with me to try to understand what people “ think ” when they are talking to me, that...
(Dickens 1841) ;
if this be so when we are merely putting together words or colours, how much more ( Wm Wordsworth 1805) ;.
In :
when the blue of heaven is growing dark (Ruskin 1836),
the context made it clear that this was a general observation.
A good example is :
at this moment the SW wind is ...whirling the leaves and blossoms about in a way that reminds me of the tricks it is
playing with the surf (Wordsworth, 1823).
Obviously, when he writes this, Wordsworth thinks of his experience (reminds), which goes beyond the actual
landscape he is looking at. The wind’s way of playing tricks with the surf is, so to say, a common feature of the
wind’s nature observed by a poet, animated perhaps, but nevertheless a stable physical law : just as water flows or
boils, it is natural for the wind to blow leaves and blossoms and the surf.
Instead of a physical law suggested by induction, it can be just a mental phenomenon presented as normal :
we believe our dreams to be real when we are dreaming (Coleridge 1816).
And then what is worded as a mere indicative can in fact have the force of an aphorism :
the Right man is always in the Right Place when he is pleasing his Par or his Mar. (Thackeray 1855).
Other examples are on the margin of habit and rule, which is not surprising since generalization is a gradual process.
About this point − and possibly about many others − we are confronted with a well-known linguistic option.
According to advocates of the conventional approach “ one word one meaning, and if you change the words you alter
the meaning ”, the sentences above cannot be strictly identified to the same sentences at the simple form, which, at
least in many cases, can be substituted for the progressive. In Wordsworth’s phrase : which reminds me of the tricks
it is playing with the surf, we have supplied the “ generic ” meaning, because the context obliges us to do so. But
Wordsworth could have written : it /always, sometimes/ plays with the surf. So that the sentence may just be a slip of
the pen, or, perhaps, hint at local use of the progressive in the Lake District. To someone used to the variationist
approach, this may rather be seen as an instance of the hesitancy characteristic of intermediate historical stages.88 It
would indeed be hard to supply an actualized meaning in this case.
88
Or perhaps only of the uncertainties of language in action.
67
But in Coleridge’s we believe our dreams to be real when we are dreaming, it seems quite possible to use the simple
form to refer to an habitual activity. Jespersen’s time-frame theory hardly applies here, unless it is taken in a very
vague sense. It is probably in such cases that the deep difference between generalization and truly generic value is
felt. The statement is not a ready-made rule or law, but rather the conclusion drawn by an empiricist from
observation of what happens. At the same time, as usual, the progressive stresses not the fact of dreaming, but the
“ involvement of the subject ” and the -ing form is very close to an adjective (cf. adreamed, already obsolete at the
time, although a-dreaming was not), especially when intransitive.
Nearly the same could be said of the following sentences, some of which were quoted above :
I by no means accede to the doctrine that ladies cannot attend to anything else when they are working (Edgeworth
1805) ;
Cf. “ occupation ; what one is engrossed in ”, suggested by Bain 1863 (cf. also the equivalents at work, busy).
In the following :
when a man is doing his business (Coleridge 1812) ;
a man, while he is courting a woman (Coleridge 1819) ;
like a horse when he is passing the door of his stable (Coleridge 1825) ;
the name of a marabout appealed to by a man when the sword is hanging over him will save his life (Eliot 1865),
the nature of the generalization is underlined by the indefinite article a/an, which is obtained, by indefinite
summation of individuals.89 In logical terms, the set is extensional, not intensional. In other cases, we have such
terms as any, people, men, also implying indefiniteness.
Eventually, we come to something which is not far from a truly generic meaning :
It is the madness and folly of man to disregard his immortal part even while it is entering its eternal state (E.BBrowning 1828) ;
and yet how hard, how impossible, to remember or to reason when the heart is breaking ( E.B-Browning 1831).
These extended uses of the progressive can readily be explained by an existential process which is not limited to
grammar. An act, strictly speaking, is something effected in the present, more or less extended in time according to
the type of process. When we say that it is actualized, we are just giving a modern equivalent of the 19th century
expression in the act of − where the spatial, inessive, preposition is revealing. Then the act may be repeated, and we
have the different stages of iteration. If iteration is more and more frequent, it becomes a habit. The term normally
applies to animates, mostly men, but can easily be extended to animals − a cat has habits of her own − and even, by
metaphor, to inanimates, provided they can pass by different “ moods ” : the sea, the atmosphere, the seasons for
example. So that in the end, the habit becomes a regular attribute : cf. “ smiling Somerset ”, a blushing girl, but
often represented by a different adjectival form : talkative, smiley.
An occupation which was only momentary when your first engaged into it and which has become habitual can be
mentioned on your identity card under the heading “ profession or occupation ” : I used to paint for my pleasure
from time to time and now I have become a painter. Repeated practice becomes profession : What is John doing ?
may get the reply : he is a musician, not unjustifiably, since occupations may change with time. The different stages
have been illustrated by the above developments. They can be summed up as follows :
act > habit (conduct) > attribute (character).
Those terms are just for commodity’s sake. As already exposed about Bain’s term of occupation, they seldom apply
indifferently to men and things : can the wind have a “ habit ” of blowing ? Applied to the physical world, a word
like rule is normally used, according to the inductive approach. Notice that we can “ make it a rule ” to abstain from
visiting at night; this is what Mrs Gaskell did:
I am not visiting in an evening (Gaskell, 1852),
but she probably did not mean that she would never alter that principle. So that, even when it becomes so
generalized, the progressive is never entirely deprived of its original existential force.
89
In Culioli's terminology, this would be called "extraction-échantillonnage"; cf. Groussier & Rivière 1996, s.v.
68
IV.5.4. Appreciatory expressions
Under the subtitle interpretation of what he calls “ aspect total ”, Buyssens 1968 : 135-156 studies a number of
binomial sentences where a progressive is used, usually in a subordinate clause, to refer to the event already
presented before in the simple form. The verb may be the same, or it may introduce a different idea connected to it,
as a sort of commentary on the first. This type of anaphora, already alluded to by Arvid Smith 1917 , Charleston
1955, and Ota 1963, was examined in Arnaud 1973 : 552-559. Adamczewski 1978 gives it a considerable
significance.
The binomial, contrastive, sentence can take different forms and if we study it in connection with when, it is only
because it is the most common and typical conjunction in present-day English for that type of subordination. We
know that when (or while ) may encompass various relationships, passing from temporal value at a given point of
time to iterative meaning (whenever) and from that to a more abstract one not very far from if and indeed leading to
it. This cannot be developed here, and is connected to the drift from simple past to modal preterit, for instance.
When a traveller of the Romantic Age was speaking of going to Rome, it was almost customary to say :
When you go to Rome, you will see /you will be seeing/ the Pope, or :
If you go to Rome...
in which case if does not imply absolute uncertainty about the journey.
Here are some typical examples borrowed from Buyssens 1968 :
When Elizabeth put Ballard to death, she was not persecuting (Macaulay, in Buyssens 1968 :136) ;
In a sense, when one of you votes Labour, you will also be voting Democrat ; and when one of you votes
Conservative, you will also be voting Republican (The Listener 17/11/1949, in Buyssens 1968 : 140).
Cases like the above, when the event reported is neither serial −although the second suggests it − nor modalized, are
exceptional ; but we find :
If I should go to one of the tea-parties in a dressing-gown and slippers, I should be insulting society, and eating peas
with my knife ( Thackeray, quoted by Jespersen, 1931 : IV, 287 ; cf. also Ljung, 1980 : 70).
If, especially when the situation is seen as somehow typical, can be substituted for when, as we see here, and the
assertion becomes hypothetical.
This seems to be essentially a dialectical or simply dialogic or even rhetorical formula, and it is certainly more
common in the written than in the spoken language. At the same time, that sort of equivalence relationship of simple
and progressive forms deserves attention in a broader perspective. Adamczewski 1978 believes that it illustrates the
basic value of the progressive as “ anaphoric ” in a wide sense : what was (simple form) an instance of doing
becomes an instance of saying. The utterer (énonciateur) has passed the predication through a “ filter ” and it is, so
to say, modalized. In other terms, the action of the subject is explicitely qualified by the speaker instead of just
reported. Similar views are expressed by Ljung 1980 :69-96 in a very enlightening chapter under the title The
interpretative progressive. This reminds us of the discrimination of “ narrative-history ” and “ discourse ” which is
the basic difference between simple past and “ passé composé ” in French, according to Benveniste 1966, 238 sq.
and passim. The schematic remarks below are just elements of what would justify long developments.
In the light of what was said in I.2. this interpretative function should not surprise us. By qualifying the subject of
the sentence for the interval of time of his act (or condition) the progressive opens the way to judgment and
appreciation of the actor. 90 It does not report an act (or merely an event) but describes a behaviour, which can be
estimated, hence the label “ appreciatory ” used here. Apart from possible metaphors, there seem to be only animatehuman subjects for that type of sentence, and declarative verbs have been quite rightly pinpointed by Buyssens
1968 :
90
As already said in I.3.2, in theory, people and not acts can be subject to appreciation or judgement. However, for
various reasons which could justify a chapter on ethical pragmatics, the judgement is often presented as bearing on
the act itself. By underlining the existential involvement of the actor-subject, the progressive has a modal
connotation, evokes the possibility of a judgement, which can be positive or negative according to the situation
(objective and subjective). In the normally dialogic situation of speech (obvious in the case of letter-writing), it is
left to the addressees to give the interpretation they like.
69
I am not reciting these facts for the purpose of recrimination... I recite them in order to explain why it was that we
did not have...between twelve and fourteen divisions fighting...(W.Churchill, in Buyssens 1968 :147) ;
I’m not saying that it isn’t attractive ; I merely say that if you were my wife I should be in a perpetual state of
agitation (Woman’s Own 29/7/1954, in Buyssens 1968 : 147).
The negations in those latter examples show the argumentative significance, the adversative force of the binomial
structure. It has often been said that the progressive adds emphasis to a statement. This is probably due to its being
firmly anchored in the situation of speech, to the existential force of be.
In our corpus, some twenty sentences can be quoted. In most of them, the first part of the binomial formula is of the
form of in -ing, or by -ing :
He used always to tell me that in giving me a good education he was leaving me the greatest good (Welsh 1820) ;
In coming down to Scotland therefore Terry would be leaving a position in which... (Scott 1828) ;
Perhaps I am doing a superfluous thing in writing all this to you (Eliot 1859) ;
you would be doing something towards this by having a carefully written review of a single book (Eliot 1858) ;
By giving occasion for more of this frivolous /.../ kind of comment/.../ I should be stepping out of my proper function
and acting for what I think an evil result (Eliot 1876) ;
But if you are acting right, I should be acting right in imitating you (Coleridge 1795).
Incidentally, the proximity of some of the -ing forms above to ordinary progressives is certainly significant and
supports the approach suggested here.
But we also find other forms of subordination such as, for example :
I should be ridiculously sinning against my own Law while I was propounding... (Coleridge 1804) ;
At the same time I should be dealing disingenuously with you were I not to tell you... (Mary Wordsworth 1821) ;
I should only be deceiving myself and misleading you, were I to encourage a hope... (Wordsworth 1838) ;
There is only one case when a plain indicative was found :
I am not using mere phrases when I say that (Eliot 1858).
IV. 6. State verbs
In the coding frame, predications of classes 1 to 5 have been called state verbs. Two points must be kept in mind
about this :
1. the coding matrix is a research frame : the labels for specific verbs or predications can always be revised
according to the observations they have provisionally supported. The quantitative approach assumes that individual
corrections of limited scope will not alter the comprehensive figures and overall conclusions ;
2. in the case of state verbs, seldom used with the progressive (prospective verbs excepted), it has already been said
that all occurrences were noted, to permit further study.
This is an old debate. Scheffer 1975, 61-4, lists the verbs which have been considered as state verbs by 10 linguists :
they are seldom unanimous, and often based on intuitions. 91 He is not the first to have noticed that such verbs are
sometimes found in the progressive.
When this happens, it is left to the researcher to decide how to account for it with reference to the basic interpretation
of the verb form. The usual solution is to say that the predication is not really stative, but refers to an activity of the
subject. It has been observed that the subjects are usually human subjects, or metaphorically so.
91
Some have tried to find stativity criteria and even tests. Remarkable in this respect is Sag 1973, who suggested a
"progressive squish" (in the line of J.R.Ross) i.e. a matrix correlating degrees of stativity to a scale of less to more
receptive environments, among which "futurate progressive", "process progressive", "habitual progressive" and
perfect progressive. A comprehensive list is also given in R.L. Allen 1966, Appendix A.
70
Considering that many grammarians are also teachers, it is neither surprising nor reprehensible that they should be
looking for an explanation which will be easy to sell to students of the different grades. A fairly common way of
doing it is to look for equivalents : in have a meal or have a look, for example, it has been suggested that take can be
be a substitute for have, since it is clearly an activity verb. This may be a device in practical teaching, but fails to be
as satisfactory for the theoretical linguist.
We all have an intuitive notion of activity ; but yet we are often at pains to justify such a term. 92
It is well-known that Aristotle’s concept of time was derived from what has been translated by “ movement ” ; yet it
seems that for the Greek philosopher what was meant by movement was fundamentally change [ metaboli ] not yet
kinesis : Physics IV, 11 (Cf. Collobert 1994 : 58 ). It is only at a second stage that the notion of continuity,
especially in the succession of “ transport ” [pheromenon ] IV, 11,219b , leads to the numbering or measurement of
time, parallel to the measurement of linear space, and in connection with speed. But the way time is conceptualized
in the system of aspect, at least in English, is better illustrated by Eleatic philosophers.
Things will probably become more clear if we avoid the concepts of duration, speed, and terms like dynamic (versus
static) in the study of English aspectual forms.
A term like “ dynamic ” suggests input of energy, and this has often been seen as an essential feature of the verb as
opposed to the noun’s “ inertia ”. Discussing this would mean a long debate, and I will give, briefly, only my own
views about it (see also I.2).
If, when accounting for the use of the progressive, we want to cover predications as different as walking and lying
(not lying down, of course !), working and sleeping or idling, talking and believing or (more usual) thinking or
hoping, we will be happier if we dismiss altogether the notion of activity to consider only the successive “ situations,
“ occupations ” or “ happenings ”, “ goings-on ” (Leech, 1971 : 14, is not the first to find it difficult to select a
covering term) affecting a subject whether animate or not, human or not. To sum up, we are dealing with temporary,
contingent states.
In another respect, and referring again to Aristotle’s discussions, it would seem that the idea of “ aspect ”
epistemologically antedates that of time93, in the sense that it does not consider the measurement which normally
underlies the concept of duration : “ normally ”, since duration may merely imply just an interval, meaning that the
event takes time, between a beginning and an end, remote from each other or not ; but the measurement of the length
of time (be it psychological time) or the mere consideration of length are irrelevant.
This is why the term “ progressive ” is inadequate and may be responsible for the above misconception. Referring
again to the Eleatic vision of time, we might say that “ events ” progress in the way Achilles does when pursuing his
tortoise, i.e. there is a successivity of intervals of space-time, external to each other. Historians of scientific thought
have shown that it is only later that a mathematical revolution will solve Zeno’s famous paradox and introduce
infinitesimal numbering. To speak less philosophically, we will say that “ progress ” is all right if by this we mean
passing from one state to another, whatever the length of time between the two. Change is a better term than
movement to name this.
It would seem that what is obvious for processes has been extended to all verb predications, following the old fallacy
that the verb is dedicated to actions. It should be stressed now and again that verbs can be used for many “ events ”
which do not correspond to activities, unless we are animists and think that shine, bloom, sound, etc. are activities of
inanimates, as well as wait, lounge or fast for animates.
92
Quirk & al. 1985 are apparently the first to have observed that lie, sit,etc. cannot be called activities, but are static
postures; they introduce the label of "stance". However, this looks like a sort of evasion. Arnaud 1973 suggested to
call "relative verbs" all the verbs of classes 1 to 6, with reference to the cognitive distinction between operations and
processes on the one hand, and relations on the other. The relation (or connection) with space, when no movement
or change ut nunc is implied, would then be characteristic of locative predications.
93
Whether this is historically true is still a debated question.
71
Grammarians as old as the Alexandrians have repeated that the verb is an adjective plus the verb to be (in its
existential sense, should we say now 94 ), so that it basically refers to what “ takes place ” at a given moment, thus
introducing the notion of successivity before that of progression. At the same time, we know that the brothers
Lumière have given us the illusion of movement by mere succession of static shots at the requisite speed.
The short-term diachronic study of state verbs in connection with progressive use may help in discriminating them
and suggesting some of the reasons why they accept or resist the progressive.
State predications, or rather state verbs in this particular case, have been grouped in classes 1 to 4 of the coding
frame, according to semantic distinctions which are not really tight but can be helpful for practical purposes.
The overall evolution for those classes is clearly shown in Figure 19, a cumulated histogram where the contribution
of the subclasses by periods can be estimated. Considering the small figures for the individual subclasses, it may be
difficult to draw clear conclusions from a detailed review.
It seems, however, that class 1 (relational-statal) plays a dominant role in the progression, and among such verbs,
that have is largely responsible. This justifies looking at this verb a little more closely.
HAVE
2 occurrences of have to can be set apart from the 104 cases. The 102 remaining have been distributed into the
following empirical categories :
1.Causatives (undoubtedly the most clear-cut category) : I am having engraved on a brass plate to be fixed up
over the street door... the following words (Dickens, 1846) : 13, including 2 ambiguous cases ;
2.“ Experience ” :
2.a. Weather (or climate) : I hope that you are having as much sunshine (Eliot, 1876) : 27 occurrences.
2.b : “ Time-span ”, “ period ” (good or bad) : we have been having much musical pleasure of late (Eliot :
1878,) : 12 occurrences.
2.c : Health : She has been having the old headaches (Gaskell, 1864) : 10 occurrences
2.d : Food : Henry and Daisy had been running and having luncheon on the hills (E.B-Browning 1831):
6 occurrences.
The remaining cases can less easily be grouped under these categories, except by metaphor or extension of the
sense : cf. I like to think that you are having all sorts of delices (Eliot , 1843) : food ? good time ? ; do you write to
Nice and say what a great suxess [sic] I am having ? (good time ?) (Thackeray, 1856).
But what about :
we shall be having a Box of Tea from Mr. Twining’s very soon (Mary Wordsworth, 1815) ?
Indeed, the attempt to find a satisfactory cover-term seems artificial and unrewarding. The term “ experience ” itself
cover all instances of use of the progressive. The progressive is the form that describes best human experience or the
condition of things at given moments, what is “ going-on ” : this includes having or being, in the momentary,
transitory sense.
Internal (be) or external (have) property is usually permanent, and this may be the principal reason for the rarity of
the progressive with the two verbs ; whereas an activity or a posture is not always habitual. But there is no intrinsic
reason to exclude the progressive in such cases. The list above shows, however, that the properties in question are
usually not physical objects, but something a little more abstract, implying interiorisation : the famous “ subjective
sense ” of the progressive.
94
We find it still in Destutt de Tracy 1825 : "Un verbe n'est autre chose qu'un adjectif uni à l'adjectif étant, qu'un
adjectif renfermant l'idée d'existence, et par cela même pouvant avoir des modes et des temps".
72
This being said, the authors display uneven tendencies with this verb : the champion is undoubtedly George Eliot,
this casting perhaps some more light on her exceptionally sensitive nature. Figure 29 has been established by
decades. It shows that the curve is resolutely rising by the forties. The contribution of George Eliot is obviously
considerable, since, for decade 8 (1865-1880), she supplies 38 of the 45 occurrences. But the slope of the curve is
not affected if we subtract her contribution. For decades 5 to 8, the other major contributors are Mrs Gaskell (17)
and Thackeray (11). One cannot make too much of such small figures, yet we notice that two women are ahead of
the group ; and also that Thackeray (who is absent from the last period since he had died earlier) displayed a clearly
“ modernist ” tendency on this account. Perhas a more extensive survey would confirm the trends the present one
merely suggests.
IV.7.
Prospective/retrospective predicates (Figure 20).
Under that label have been collected a hybrid numer of predicates with the following two characteristics :
1.They refer to mental states or conditions, “ private ”, non-overt “ activities ” − to repeat the disputable term of
several grammarians : “ attitudes ” seems more justifiable. This is why they have commonly been included among
state verbs.
2.They are supposed to have a certain “ dynamic ” force, since they are oriented to a prospect ; but − and in this
respect they differ from process verbs − what they are aiming at, their goal, is not a result in the sense of being a
completion or achievement of the “ activity ” they represent (see 1.3.3.a.). It is difficult to use completely
unambiguous terms in this case: prospect seems less ambiguous than goal. In terms of “ truth value ”, of “ being the
case that ”, what such predications are aiming at is the realization of another event than the mental event they
designate. What obscures it is that this outcome is not always represented by a verb-phrase but fairly often by a
noun-phrase.
In terms of boundaries, this means that the right-side boundary is open, since it opens the following interval rather
than closing the previous one. This is why prospective verbs are at the same time analogous to locative verbs and
different from them. When you are sitting you are not expecting to stand up or to lie down, although you know that
in the natural course of events you will certainly have to. The same will be seen if we refer to unbounded movement
verbs : a horse may canter and then run, but running is not the prospect of his canter.
A verb like wait is significant in this respect. Etymologically, it is connected to watch, and does not imply the
directionality which becomes explicit in wait for, and has also become associated with the verb used alone. It could
have been included among locatives, were it not that the prospective sense is now the most usual.
So that prospective verbs are a class of their own, for research purposes at least. The mental states they normally
refer to are dynamic, oriented towards a future event, for the realization of which they are not responsible. By
definition also, these states are transitory, and could very well be expressed by temporary adjectives. When a mother
is “ expecting a baby ” she is said to be “ expectant ” or “ pregnant ”, and when a hen is “ hatching ”, the verbal
status of the term can be disputed. The inessive force of the -ing form had often been underlined, and was still
sometimes represented in 19th century English by the prefix a-. Just as one can be asleep instead of sleeping, one can
be awaiting instead of just waiting, to mention two of the cases when the inessive preposition-prefix has survived.
Another point to be underlined concerning these predicates, is that they accept only animate subjects, essentially
human ones, except, as usual, by metaphor : some supper, which was waiting for us there (Dickens, 1845). Also,
they are what Ota 1964 calls “ I-verbs ”, meaning they are mostly found at the first or second persons, a fact which is
connected with the previous remark.
Even mere intuition − such as we find in Hatcher’s article of 1951 − suggests that the class is not homogeneous with
respect to the use of the progressive. We are quite familiarized with it with expect, look for, plan, and wait (for) or
even watch (for) ; but verbs like want, wish, have always been embarrassing, and think (of) alluding to a project is
one that raises the question of the “ activity ” component of verbs which Vendler has classified among state verbs.
In a sense, we accept more readily that sleep, suffer or even die may be seen as active than such verbs of purely
mental reference.
• It is not possible here to try to solve the problems. Perhaps, if we accept that the activity of language, even when
it does not look like it, is always dialogic (which is obvious in the case of letter-writing), considerations of
“ observability ” or “ evidence ” suggested by Ljung 1980 will help us greatly. For such “ activities of the mind ”,
the speaker (or the letter-writer here) is the only warrant : they are subjective, as we say, and the dichotomy between
73
“ referring and non-referring predicates ” which, according to Russell, Searle and Ljung, applies to performatives,
may also be applied in the case of some prospectives. In this respect, promise would be a good introduction, since it
is a well-known performative, but one where the truth-value or “ being the case ” of the “ thing ” promised is
deferred. So that :
•
• *I am promising to write soon
is not acceptable, whereas :
He has been promising to write soon,
She is promising to write soon,
though not very natural perhaps, are more acceptable.
Wish can also be a performative :
I wish you luck.
Yet we find :
I am wishing Margaret many happy returns of the day (G. Eliot, 1879).
where the performative force can hardly be disputed : another example of the audacity in George Eliot’s use of the
progressive. One cannot speak of understatement in this case, but rather of overstatement. This emphatic use of the
progressive has often been noted, and we have here a typical example.
One way of accounting for it is to say that by using a constative rather than a performative utterance, George Eliot is
less authoritative : instead of the usual, non-referring speech-act relying on her social right to utter a wish, she
actually refers to it, objectifies it, just as a wishing-bone is used to give some magic strength to a promise of
marrying soon.
This is a sophisticated justification for a statement of everyday life, where wishing does not cost much, but this might
be the path leading to the extension of the progressive to subjective verbs, among which prospective predicates are
included.
This also might help us to account for the degrees of acceptability of the progressive between, say, expect and hope.
Expect is just a factual statement, whereas hope implies stronger affective involvement. In the dialectics of
interpersonal influence or even authority, they will have a different status. A person in authority, a father for
example, can say :
1.I expect you to pass your exam ;
2.I hope you will pass.
Which of the two is more likely to be taken as a demand ?
That prospective verbs should be included among “ state verbs ”, hence not easily found with the progressive, is
contradicted by their comparative frequency in our corpus : some 1330 occurrences have been counted, for the list
of verbs below (in alphabetical order) :
aim, anticipate, apprehend, await,cast about, clamour for, contemplate, crave after, desire, die (for, to), dread, drive
(special), dream, entertain, expect,fear ; forget, frame wish, gape for, gird off for, groan for, hanker, hatch, hope,
hunger (for) hunt (for), intend, itch, languish, long (for), look (for, forward, to, mean, meditate, muse, need, pant
(for), pine (for), plan, project, promise, purpose,rave (for), raven (for), scheme (for), search, seek,sigh (after, for)
starve (for), strive (after, for) tend (to), think (of), thirst (for), threaten, tire (for), try (for) vow, wait,want,watch,
weary (for, to), wish, yearn (after, for).
As already said, the group is not homogeneous. Tentatively, the following subgroups can be suggested (the number
of occurrences is between brackets) :
1.Expectation : besides expect (96), wait (279), − and await (23) −, is the most typical of “ objective ” orientation to
a future happening, with comparatively small affective involvement. Such predications could easily be assimilated
74
to mere locatives, although the latter are more neutral towards the inevitable end of the situation they describe.
Watch (for)(1), anticipate (6) can also be included here.
2.Plan : in common terms, planning is intellectual anticipation, implying some activity, so that the following verbs
might have been included among process verbs, with e.g. prepare. The subgroup would include : aim (9), cast about
(4), contemplate (6), intend (29), plan ( 21), project (4), promise (1), purpose (13), scheme (for) (8), search (for)
(2), seek (20), tend (to) (5), think (of) (86), try (for) (1). Clearly, such intellectual anticipations may also imply
more or less positive or negative involvement, since, generally speaking, consideration of the future seldom leaves
people entirely indifferent, hence the well-known link of futurity and modality. In this respect promise could be seen
in some contexts as the opposite of threaten which is included in the next group, due to its intrinsic semantic content.
3.Emotion : apprehend (1), clamour for (1), contemplate (6), crave after (1), desire (4), die (for, to) ( (14), dread
(2), drive (1), dream (5), entertain (1), fear (6) ; frame wish (1), gape for (1), gast for (2), gird off for (1), groan for
(1), hanker (after) (3), hatch (1), hope (63), hunger (for) (3), hunt (for) (9), intend (19), itch (1), languish (1), long
(for) (66), look (for (134), look forward to ( 52), look (on) to (9), mean (25), meditate (57), muse (1), need (6), pant
(for) (3), pine (for) (9), rave(n) (for) (1) , raven (for) (1), sigh (after) (for) (3) starve (for) (1), strive (after, for) (4)
tend (to) (5),thirst (for) (3), threaten (6), tire (for) (2), try (for) (1), vow (1), want (56), weary (for, to) (17), wish
(39), yearn (after, for) (8).
With different degrees, these verbs imply valuation of the expected event, and affective involvement, positive (hope)
or negative (dread, threaten).
Between the subgroups, the limits are not strict, and must be appreciated in context. But, generally speaking, the
distinctions may lead to different meanings of the progressive with reference to human subjects, which is normally
the case.
With subclass 1, the quite natural use of the progressive is equivalent to what we find in locative predications, with
the important difference that these prospective ones are transitive and that their “ object ” − what is anticipated − lies
in the (usually near) future ; a future which is not part of the meaning of locatives.
Subclass 2 stresses activity − usually mental − and it can be assimilated to ordinary processes, with the major
reservation (see above) that the outcome is not a result of that activity in the usual sense. If we consider a plan as the
result of planning it is only a transitory one95, not the real future objective, and if it can be said that the “ result ” of
promising is a promise, this is only valid when it constitutes a performative utterance (present tense, first person) : in
all other contexts, it refers to a future accomplishment relying on the word of the subject, normally human.
We can see that subclass 3 is totally different, even though there is a certain amount of interference. In terms of the
number of verbs, it is the richest with our romantic writers, probably because it embodies degrees of emotional
involvement and suggests stylistic effects. This involvement will be stressed by using the progressive. At the same
time the attention is shifting from the expected event to the expectant people and their feelings.
The frequency of the progressive with subclass 3 deserves special consideration.
Two of these verbs have always attracted the attention, above all of prescriptive grammarians. Want is a case in
point, which was usually ill-treated, its use in the progressive being considered as a scotticism − an instance of the
common propensity of taking foreigners for scape-goats. 46 cases, presented below, were found, of which one or
two can be taken as meaning lack, with possibly adjectival status. Among the people responsible we find such
notoriously Scottish people as Jane Austen, Thackeray, George Eliot and Mrs Gaskell !... To tell the truth, we find it
also in the letters of Walter Scott, Carlyle and his wife, but far less than in Mrs Gaskell’s. Remembering that Bain,
who censored such scotticisms in his Higher English Grammar of 1863, was himself a Scotsman, born at Aberdeen
in a rather low class of society, we will refer this to the well-known self-criticism and social insecurity of educated
people in everyday contact with a local dialect considered as substandard.
Sociolinguists of the Labovian persuasion will describe such cases as stereotypes, the surface phenomena on which
people focus their critical eye for prescription and proscription.
95
An interesting case in the typology of "objects", a very deceitful term: see for example, Jespersen 1931, III:232
sq.). Plan would be the cognate object of planning.
75
Wish was probably less stigmatized. Yet it is also supposed not to accept the progressive easily : 39 cases have been
found with a variety of letter-writers.
In the following, we may easily admit that it is the outward expression which is described, so that it becomes an
overt activity similar to asking, or calling :
Mr Bowles has been wishing to take some extracts from Field’s Church (Coleridge 1815) ;
Anny is always wishing for you (Thackeray 1848) ;
Mamma has been wishing for a wind to blow away the cholera (Ruskin 1832). Ruskin was only 13 when he wrote
this.
But the majority of cases definitely refer to the usual psychological meaning, e.g. :
Mr. J.W. frightens me. He will have you. I see you at the altar... He must be wishing to attach you (.Austen 1817) ;
I have been wishing for your advice (Macaulay 1842) ;
I...am always wishing I was at home in New York (Thackeray 1853).
Thinking
No verb can better refer to mental activity than think, and it has been suggested in I.2. that Descartes’ cogito could be
translated by a progressive in modern English. In our corpus, many instances of think or think of and even think to
have been found with prospective force : the 86 examples mentioned above. Discussing the point at large would
carry us too far, since “ thinking ” is of great complexity — a commonplace:
1.In terms of the time-sequence − the basic dimension of the progressive − it is a Janus-concept. The speaker’s
“ thoughts ” can be directed, besides the actual present, backward in the direction of the past (sometimes with
postposed back), or forward in the direction of the future. But in all cases it can be treated as agentive mental
activity : witness Rodin’s famous Thinker, whose static posture nevertheless suggests that “ something is going on
inside ”, invisibly (Cf. Martin Joos’s notion of “ private verbs ”). We will leave to psychologists the task of
accounting for this activity of the mind which the gerundial form “ thinking ” actually suggests : as we know, the
neurological processes it implies can be measured by encephalography. The common representation of thinking as
an activity makes it all the easier for this verb to be used with the progressive.
2.In a theory of speech-acts, it may also be ambiguously interpreted in the two ways suggested by Ljung 1980, 45 sq.
and passim, either as a quasi-performative, a non-referring predicate, or as a “ constative ” (expressive) predicate
referring to what is passing within the mind of the speaker. By using the progressive, the speaker may wish to give
his statement a less authoritative effect, something one had to guess when the simple form was the one normally
available. I think is a (mild) performative, since it “ juridically ” forces you to take the assertion seriously −even if
you know that people sometimes lie − ; I am thinking openly describes a “ state of mind ” with no outward
manifestation except what the speaker says, but in such a way that you are not obliged, whatever your confidence in
her/him, to accept what she/he thinks as definitely reflecting the judgement it introduces. This is of course valid at
the first person and when followed by a proposition, but may also help to understand the many facets of other cases.
Examples illustrating this are presented below in IV.9 on that-clauses (object clauses). It becomes obvious that it is
only in this sort of utterances that think can be included among state verbs, in the subclass of declaratives.
76
IV.8.
Modal auxiliaries
It seemed reasonable to expect the use of the progressive with modal auxiliaries to spread. For the whole corpus, the
number (831) is less than 4 % of the total. Broken into the different classes of modals, 96 the figures are too small to
give more than indications: Figures 30 to 33. There seems to be some progression affecting all modals, with the
possible exception of must, but, compared to the general curve (Figure 31), the curve appears slightly less sloping.
The graphs give an idea of how each modal (or pair) is affected. They have been computed by decades to provide a
more legible picture.
This point certainly ought to be studied further in connection with semantic variations in a domain notoriously
subtle. Only a list of quotations is given below, by individual authors and in chronological order, with a few brief
comments.
Dorothy WORDSWORTH
1787
but I shall be making you as melancholy as myself
1793
but enough, he is my Brother, why should I describe him ? I shall be launching again into panegyric
1795
it will place me in such a situation that I shall be doing something
1796
It was singular enough that they should be assisting at a fire
1811
should you be going away before the end of next week (...) we set off, ...
1801
We then concluded that you must have been coming yesterday
1805
but I find that he must have been standing there pleading to be admitted, for at least ten minutes
1815
for people who might be relied upon for the journey must be constantly coming from Paris
1820
How you must be enjoying yourselves on this beautiful day !
Below, a few other pioneering attempts. The above would not be exceptional today, but they certainly were at the
time, stressing as they do Dorothys’emotional involvement.
1800
or perhaps Harriet may be writing to Elizabeth
The context makes it clear that this is a suggestion, not a guess.
1822
but we are afraid you will be getting married
Notice how this all-important event in Dorothy’s world as well as in her contemporary Jane Austen’s
affecting the subject − a girl − in submission to a course of events already ordained.
96
97
is seen as
Putting together shall and will, may and might, can and could is not really justified for all cases, but may be valid
for a rough estimate of the development.
97
Cf.her letter of 1817 to Cassandra : Mr. J.W. frightens me. He will have you. I see you at the altar. I know it must
be so. He must be wishing to attach you.
77
1817
I may have heard these particulars from someone who had visited her, and I must still be turning to this subject
It is unusual, even today, to use this form to express compulsion or necessity.
.I ...hope that ... it [your illness] may be taking a resolution to leave you altogether.
The expression, stressing immediacy, is quite normal today, but was rare at the time.
Mary WORDSWORTH
1821
At the same time I should be dealing disingenuously with you were I not to tell you...
A clear case of appreciative-adversative comment (see IV.5.4.).
SOUTHEY
1807
Your nameless daughter must be now advancing towards weeks of kissability
and your raw hands must be getting more useful every day
They are so interwoven ...that I must either relate all myself − or be continually stopping to explain and refer the
reader to...
These are quoted only because they seem to be among the earliest examples. In the latter two, must clearly expresses
necessity.
William WORDSWORTH
1818
Either they must surpass us in zeal, ... or some other powers must be acting on their side
Necessity/obligation again, not probability : the context makes it clear.
1830
Attend particularly to John’s pronunciation at Church – his unaty, his charaty, his inexpressable, and the
Northernisms that must unavoidably be creeping upon him.
1834
Should I be silent upon the part you have taken as the Public Leader of the 62 or 63 Petitioners, I should not be
treating you with sincerity.
1838
I should only be deceiving myself and misleading you, were I to encourage a hope
Two cases of appreciatory binomial.
COLERIDGE
1795
But if you are acting right, I should be acting right in imitating you.
1804
I should be ridiculously sinning against my own Law while I was propounding
Binomial appreciatory sentences again.
78
DICKENS
1826
Her answer was... so that she could be working on one while the other was drying.
I am inclined to think you must have been anathematizing me pretty considerably, for not keeping my promise.
Early examples of something not unusual today.
THACKERAY
1836
Thou knowest well as I, Beowulf, we must be hammering at the head of the spear
Again a must of obligation.
1849
I shall be forgetting my own text
1850
and until I had got up my courage at 12 o’clock when I thought the Xning could be taking place and said Amen there
IV.9.That-clauses
Subordinate clauses introduced by THAT or WHETHER, etc., and other such patterns with a declarative or cognitive
verb in the main clause, are usually called object-clauses . The two types of verbs can be treated separately.
IV.9.1. Declarative verbs :
A declarative verb is often used in an utterance which is not very different from a performative. Some
transformationalists (McCawley, for example) even suggested that a performative ought to be introduced at the early
stage of derivation of all sentences, even when it does not appear on the surface.
What interests us here is the occurrence of the progressive on the left side of a final pattern such as :
I declare /am declaring /that Sir Robert is a fool
The theory of performatives, beginning with Austin himself, has underlined that a true performative is in the present
indicative, first person. It has also been remarked that it excludes the progressive.
There is an interesting discussion of this point in Ljung 1980 : 97 sq. According to him, declarative verbs, which he
calls illocutionary, with reference to Austin’s famous analyses (Joos 1964 calls them asseverative), usually enter in
non-referring predicates. Ljung also alludes to Bertrand Russell’s discussions, anticipating even Austin’s. Although
Russell and logicians of the post-kantian tradition make use of the concept of truth-value, which may be regarded
with some diffidence by linguists, the views expressed by Ljung are enlightening. Illocutionary utterances, he says,
in the same way as performative utterances “ do not refer because they are used to express a relation between the
speaker’s mind and a proposition...I suggest that we refer to such uses of predicates as expressions ” 1980 : 104. In
Russell’s terms, such assertions have no truth-value.
Ljung goes on to study a certain number of cases, taken from present-day usage, and encounters situations when a
progressive can be found in utterances which, on first inspection, may appear as similar. The consideration of tense
and person is essential, just as with performatives, and, according again to Ljung :
1.In some cases, declarative verbs are used in a “ reportive ” way, referring to events : this is normally what happens
with other persons than the first, other tenses than the present.
2.In other cases, they are “ expressive ” of the relationship of the speaker and his predication : this is normally the
case with the first person in the present tense.
But we would then have to account for statements of the following type :
? I am suggesting that we leave.
79
Though unusual, it is not unacceptable. It means that the speaker is actually reporting on his own speech-act, just as
a police constable might possibly say : I am arresting you (see above I.3.2), probably by some sort of
understatement.
The above remarks will help us in the following brief survey of that-clauses in 19th century English.
you will understand that I am stating what I know (Dickens 1847) ;
if I come to Italy en garçon (as I am already swearing I will) (Dickens 1847).
Obviously, Dickens is not uttering an oath, but reporting it. This is very similar to the sentences studied above in
IV.5. 3 on generic use and when clauses. These are the only two quotations (and the first is not a that-clause) in our
corpus when the first person present is used, to quote Ljung 1980, 106, in a “ split ego ” situation, where the speaker
refers... but to himself and his own speech-act.
The following is more difficult to accept :
I am presuming that the fact of the 2 vols. having been lettered “ The Works of G E ”...( Eliot 1862).
The only justification seems to be, just as for the fictional constable alluded to, that this is an understatement. By
presenting her statement − the illocutionary force of which is somehow dubious, but which is definitely to include
among declarative verbs − as a constative referential predication, she wants to soften what might be taken, by the
publisher she is addressing, as a reproof.
The other that-clauses are more clearly of the constative (“ reportive ”) type.
While Opposition is asserting that the Catholic Association is eminently beneficial, Mr Canning as positively asserts
that it is a pest (Wordsworth 1825).
This sentence illustrates the adversative-interpretative meaning we have already noticed. At a superficial level this is
similar to a “ time-frame ” effect, but in fact the relationship is of a dialectical type. Which of the two assertions is
most emphasized is however difficult to tell : the emphasis is rather in the contrast between the two.
The following can easily be seen, due to the use of past tenses, as merely narrative-descriptive.
I was only begging and entreating that some one of them should keep watch (Coleridge 1832) ;
I was confessing the other day that I felt myself (...) growing credulous of joy (E. B.- Browning 1841) ;
I was laughing and maintaining that mine shd be as like as his [portrait] (E.B.- Browning 1846) ;
I hope that you had been conjecturing that there must have been some mistake to account for my silence to your note
( Eliot 1863) ;
Henry and I were agreeing yesterday that... (Eliot 1880) ;
I was remarking that here one was allowed to be anything one liked except a fool, or a bore − to which he
answered... (Welsh 1841) ;
A lady was suggesting to me the other day that...(Welsh 1837) ;
I had just been propounding to Forster if it is not a wonderful testimony to the homely force of truth, that one of the
most popular books on earth has nothing in it to make anyone laugh or cry [Robinson Crusoe] ( Dickens 1856) ;
a certain young Irishman has been insisting occasionally these two years that I...must absolutely come out and pay
him a visit (Carlyle 1838) ;
Twice, I think, just after I had been declaring that he was evidently getting better, he came upon us next night
(Carlyle 1834) ;
I had been holding forth and asserting that I thought I could exercise the influence (Dickens 1842) ;
and Mrs. Boyd had been confessing that she had lost all her taste for poetry (E. B.Browning 1831) ;
My pen has been declaring itself independent this half hour (Scott 1829).
The following :
80
...saying that Ld Lonsdale has been naming that next week was the time that...(Mary Wordsworth 1814),
is the transposition of a clearly performative (even official) speech-act : reported speech.
As to the examples below, they seem to concern not the mental facts (which Joos 1964 called “ private ”), but their
outward expression. Searle 1969 and Ljung 1980 suggest discussion of the various types of such declarative
predicates in terms of “ sincerity conditions ”.
Booksellers are every year finding it more and more their interest to sell an increased number of copies at a low
price rather than... (Wordsworth 1838) ;
everbody at Chawton will be hoping and predicting that they cannot be good for anything [gloves] (Austen 1813) ;
I hope that you had been conjecturing that there must have been some mistake to account for my silence to your note
(Eliot 1863) ;
when we were regretting to Ld Sligo that we had missed seeing so many persons on our tour...(Edgeworth 1834) ;
Papa was regretting the other day that he did not question him (E. B.-Browning 1831).
This is perhaps too simple a way of accounting for the transposition from “ private ” thought − when the subject is
the only warrant of the truth-value of his statement − to public expression. If we see the question in terms of truthvalue, we can say that the person reporting about it is actually endorsing that truth-value.
Prospective verbs, too, are often “ private ” verbs, corresponding to states of mind ; but they may also be declarative,
in which case the same principle as above applies : when the tense is not present and first person, the statement
becomes constative :
everybody at Chawton will be hoping and predicting that they cannot be good for anything else (Austen 1813).
Think
As exposed in IV.7. on prospective predications, think is a typical case of multivalence. Its presence in the headclause introducing an “ object ” clause (usually with that) is the clearest circumstance when it can be included among
state predications. It can be considered as a quasi-performative and the syntactical and pragmatic constraints deserve
to be studied further for the period surveyed here. Only a few glimpses are given here.
Just as for classical performatives, the typical context of declarative force is the present tense, first person.
Consequently, many of the quotations below would probably be found odd in present-day English of the controlled
type.
and if summer were come I am thinking it will be well to secure quarters about Kirkcaldy (Carlyle 1821 ) ;
Things are better ordered considerably as they are − I’m thinking (Welsh 1826) ;
We are thinking that if the Kitchen grate is still to set, it might be as well to...(Carlyle 1828).
The three quotations above are from the Carlyles. They seem to be clear cases of scotticism − notwithstanding our
reservations about this label ; at the same time the declarative force is undisputable.
and I am thinking with delight that you will learn something of Mrs. Burne-Jones (Eliot 1870) ;
I am writing a book and thinking that I will never finish it (Eliot 1871) ;
I am thinking whether it would not be wise to retire from the world and live here (Eliot 1852) ;
But I am thinking that I may well be dédommagée by going back with Mrs. Boyd (E. B.-Browning 1831).
In the above, despite the presence of that, we may accept that the utterance is rather of the constative-descriptive
type, hence referential. The reference is to a state of the mind modalizing the assertion : with delight in the first
example, underlines this subjectivity. In the last sentence, by E.B.-Browning, this is less obvious, so that the
expression may just be an understatement. Another point would concern the interval of time often necessary for
passing from intention to decision. Suppose a king saying to a minister : “ I think the army should be sent there ”,
this would be taken as a decision of the king : but not everyone is as authoritative. Human relations include degrees
and a subtle interplay between the parties : language is dialogic.
I daresay I’m thinking that I stay on, not to meet the Bishop...(Thackeray 1850).
81
Thackeray begins with “ I daresay ” : already, whatever the interpretation we give, this is a precaution. He
definitely −we understand it as well as his correspondent − does not wish to meet the Bishop, but he still hesitates,
and possibly expects advice.
as I often sit a long time without saying anything - when I am thinking, or when I am thinking I am thinking (Dickens
1845) ;
I am often thinking I ought still to try ( Carlyle 1870).
These two examples show that that is not enough to signal a declarative predication : often underlines the descriptive
meaning.
Are you thinking you are never to see my sweet face anymore ? (Welsh 1826) ;
It is better, you are thinking, as it is (Welsh 1826) ;
you are thinking I presume,that I might have done your bidding with less delay (Welsh, 1826).
The second person does not always entirely eliminate the declarative force, as the first sentence shows. Yet, the
utterance becomes normally referential descriptive. It must have been difficult at the time, however, to use the
progressive in this connection, except possibly in Scotland.
IV.9.2. Cognitive verbs
“ Object ” clauses are also found after cognitive verbs. We will not undertake a typology of such patterns, but they
are mentioned merely because they are supposed to be averse to the progressive in the main clause .
In the three sentences which follow, we notice a special use of the cognitive verbs which usually, in school
grammars, is referred to their activity component.
another had been seeing his horse’s coat cut and his tail docked [reported speech] (Thackeray 1829) ;
Notice that, in this case, the sense may be causative, close to have the coat cut and the tail docked.
Hearn wants you to be spying out and seeing if you cannot see a little roughbear coat (Gaskell 1852) ;
I have been hearing from Miss Marshall how long suffering and kind Mr. Bray is towards him (Eliot 1865) ;
Did you ever hear, or are you hearing now for the first time, that Mr Irving dreams dreams and sees visions ? (E.
B.-Browning 1831).
In the next :
and even in Edinr one is constantly hearing : such and such people “ are not in my way ” (Welsh 1837),
there is not need to refer to Scottish usage. It has been included here because of the “ object ” expression reported,
but it is not substantially different from other cases when hear has a noun object.
Verbs such as find and believe have been included among cognitive verbs in a wide sense. They can also be
followed by an “ object ” clause :
I went out for a solitary walk and was finding myself tant soit peu tired of my dear little companions (Thackeray
1851) ;
All day I had been finding it the greatest possible hardship to have to sit upright (Welsh 1842).
Whereas in Wordsworth’s third person statement already quoted :
Booksellers are every year finding it more and more their interest to sell an increased number of copies at a low
price rather than... (Wordsworth 1838),
we may assume that he is reporting on booksellers’complaints. The first person tells us of a state of mind the truthvalue of which is definitely endorsed by Thackeray and Welsh above, so that, even in past tenses, the progressive
must be somewhat exceptional. However, we may recognize again a split-ego situation.
I know... and that you will be believing me a dead woman if I delay any longer (Welsh 1823).
82
This time, Scottish usage may well be responsible.
practical purposes, to an “ object ” that-clause.
98
98
The accusative construction has been identified here, for
Some reflection should certainly be applied to the reasons for that "dialectal" use, as well as for the use of the
progressive in India, even today.
83
CHAPTER FIVE
LINGUISTICS AND LITERATURE
While claiming that our letter-writers showed as much spontaneity as any other literate people, we cannot, however,
entirely forget who they were. There is a sociology of literature as old at least as Hippolyte Taine, the author of a
once popular Histoire de la littérature anglaise 1864-1869: “ Race, milieu, moment ” − race, environment, moment
− was the framework within which he and other contemporaries justified the flowering of literature at given places
and historical periods, classical ages especially. Such views have been elaborated by modern sociologists. They do
not deny the rights of the individual to have her or his own style. Should we consider the use of the progressive form
as a significant element in the style of a writer ?
For the present limited excursion into a controversial domain, we will take style in a very general sense, i.e. a
writer’s original manner of writing, with the only ambition of providing data and suggestions. Scholars, especially in
France, have attempted to shed some light on the practice of writers, with sophisticated statistical studies of their
vocabulary and chosen grammatical features. 99 That Pythagorean approach can be frustrating : between Mallarmé’s
dictum of “ La littérature ” as “ le hasard vaincu mot après mot ” (Variations sur un sujet : Le mystère dans les
lettres), and a less idealized view, there is a wide margin where we find for example “ period style ” (Regency: Jane
Austen and even Thackeray), or local style (Scott’s use of Scots in his novels), Kiltartanese (Yeats, Synge and the
Celtic revival), social style (popular speech with Dickens and many others), and the more or less laborious attempts
at imitating the language of the past in historical novels (Kingsley’s Westward Ho, Thackeray’s Henry Esmond,
Flaubert’s Salammbô, etc.). Ultimately, we have the original features a reader can recognize in the individual writer,
the daily bread of university courses. So long as literature is made of words, 100 we all know what style,or
“ écriture ”, can be, without always being able to give a clear definition of it.
The main question for the linguist is that of consciousness, i.e. the deliberate use of a given item, even in novels or
other fiction, supposedly less constraining than poetry for example. Then, we will contradict the somewhat
paradoxical view we have adopted of literary writers as common people with another dictum : “ once a writer,
always a writer ”, just as comedians or politicians, for example, are supposed never to forget their role.
There are few occasions to suspect the correspondence of the 22 people in the sample, most of them writers, to
justify this dictum to a large extent. However it may be a clue to some idiosyncrasies in the corpus and to the
independent use of the progressive by some of the letter-writers. Browning and Coleridge on the negative side, Jane
Austen and Thackeray on the positive side, are cases in point, but we find some digressions in many letters
reminding us for example that Macaulay was a parliamentary orator, a remarkable historian and essay-writer, Carlyle
an indefatigable polemist, and George Eliot sometimes a sesquipedalian philosopher. This is in fact related to topic
rather than to style and can be taken as an accident since such digressions occur, just as they do in private
conversations, in practically all collections of letters ; but for example, they are absent − not to mention Catherine
Ruskin, the essayist’s mother, whose English is erratic − from Mary Wordsworth’s correspondence : she was not a
writer nor even very intellectual, one of the possible reasons for the high frequency of a familiar item in her letters.
Then, less disputably, a person who is busy writing a long novel can be expected to convey to her or his other writing
activities some features of the literary work in progress.
The place where we find some common ground with letter-writing in literature proper is obviously the novel. Poetry
has to be left out, even in long narrative poems such as Wordsworth’s Prelude, or Browning’s The Ring and the
Book101 : the constraints of verse are such that a grammatical item cannot be said to occur as freely in poetry as in
99
Some of the promoters were English, however: Yule 1944, Herdan 1964,1966. Let's only mention, among others:
Muller 1964,1968; Thoiron 1979; Juillard 1983; see also Sven Jacobson (ed.) 1983.
100
Mallarmé was probably the first to stress it so strongly"
101
Even if Oscar Wilde is known to have said: "Meredith is a prose Browning... and so was Browning"...
84
prose.102 When Coleridge or Wordsworth published some prose, that was not in novels, which excludes them from
this line of study.
When a comparison between novels and letters can be attempted, there are two ways of doing it :
1. by considering individual novels, trying to discover whether the progressive can be a token of something
characteristic, in itself or in association with other items. Needless to say, this requires a qualitative study to
complement the quantitative observations. Notice, however, that the density of linguistic items could very well
be used for expertise, along with other facts when possible, either to attribute a text to so and so, or to locate it in
so and so’s career. Let’s suppose that a novel should be unearthed and thought to have beenwritten by Jane
Austen at the end of her life, a statistics considerably different from that presented below could be invoked to
dispute the attribution ; with Jane Austen more than with many others, because her novels have a notable
homogeneity of style.103
2. The second approach is diachronic : given the rising curve of a writers’use of the progressive in the letters, to
what extent is there a parallel in the novels ?
Only very few insights are attempted here.
V.1.
Individual works :
The density of progressives in George Eliot’s Romola is remarkable (370). It is known that she spent a lot of time
doing research in view of it, while her publisher John Blackwood was desperately waiting. He wrote to his wife in
1861 : “ Her great difficulty seems to be that she, as she describes it, hears her characters talking, and there is a
weight upon her mind as if Savonarola and friends ought to be speaking Italian instead of English ” (Haight 1968 :
349). Notice the modal progressive used by Blackwood (1818-1879), a Scotsman.104
We know what pains Romantic or post-Romantic writers of historical novels took to convey the sense of historical
distance which was absent from classical literature, trying to give at least an outlandish ring to their sentences, were
it only by the spelling.105 They are seldom rewarded, George Eliot not any more than Gustave Flaubert, by the
appreciation of present-day readers ; but, at the time, Romola was a success : the Queen presented it to Disraeli.
Was this intensive use of the progressive, for which there exists a replica in Italian − but much less common − one of
the ways of giving to the verbose novel, in the narrative and the dialogues, a sort of Florentine ring ? The frequent
recurrence of certain grammatical items, less clearly perceived by the reader than, for example, names of people
(Baldassare, the Frati), or of Italian place names, was perhaps thought apt to carry the imagination away to the
Florence of the Medici, instead of to Cimmerian mists, as could be the case in some Scottish tales106. In many stories
or comic plays, the progressive was commonly used as a shibboleth of the Irish. So is it, apparently, in Samuel
Lover’s Handy Andy: Lover was an Irishman himself, but he left his native Dublin at 36. The density found in this
famous Irish humorous story of 1842 is fairly high for the time (270), but not above that in Dickens’s Curiosity Shop,
published in 1841. On looking more closely at it, we see that the progressives are concentrated in the dialogues of
the Irish characters. It is even possible that Lover, who had become a literary figure in London − he was with
Dickens among the founders of Bentley’s Miscellany − may have, consciously or not, avoided what he knew was a
102
Goux's 1971 original statistical study of the progressive in Pop-music shows that it was comparatively a common
item in Tin-pan-alley at the time of the Beatles. On this point, see also Scheffer 1975, p.103-5. Why is it so ? The
rhyme or the length of the verbal syntagm may be one of the reasons in Good day sunshine where we find :
I love her and she is loving me .
103
The same could be said of Hemingway, for example, who appears to have shunned the progressive.
104
As a matter of fact, density in his own letters attains the level of 374, a higher figure than for any of our writers,
for a sizeable corpus of nearly 100 000 words. His son William, for a much smaller corpus, shows a density of 418.
In spite of censure, the progressive seems to have prospered in the middle nineteenth century in Scotland, even
among the literati. Boswell had died long ago.
105
Leconte de Lisle wrote Qain for Cain, and Charles Péguy, in Victor Marie Comte Hugo, tells the amusing story
of how Victor Hugo invented Jerimadeth (j'ai rime à -dait − rhyming with Ruth se demandait) for his poem Booz
endormi in La Légende des Siècles, the name of a place not found in atlases, even German !
106
Tulloch 1980: 296 did not attempt a thorough study of the progressive in Scott's novels. He mentions a few cases,
looking like ordinary shibboleths of the time.
85
distinctive celticism, often laughed at : the title of his burlesque opera Il Paddy whack in Italia is an indication of his
attitude to the speech of the Irish and to their boisterous and pugnatious manners.
Grammatical shibboleths are certainly less common than those concerning pronunciation or vocabulary, and, when
they consist of phrases, they are not very different. In they are after killing your pigs, neighbour, the Irish
construction, often quoted, becomes a set-phrase. It is much more difficult to have systematic dispersion of a feature
over the whole narrative, especially, when the shibboleth is a shibboleth of magnitude : the progressive was already
common enough in England so that it was not noticed most of the time ; but the Irish or the Scotch − as they were
still called − simply made more extensive use of it.
Conversely, we find a refusal of the progressive as a modern feature in Thackeray’s Henry Esmond. A chapter in
The language of Thackeray (Phillips 1978) is dedicated to it. Commenting on a sharp criticism of Fitzedward Hall in
Modern English 1873 giving a list of Thackeray’s anachronisms, Phillipps admits that Hall is right to censure a
sentence like was being battered down : even now, nobody has been able to find an occurrence of progressive
passive before the second half of the 18th century (Denison 1998 ; Nakamura 1998), whereas Esmond takes place
during the reign of Queen Anne (1702-1714). The question of what is valid and what is not in Thackeray’s novel is
beyond the present project, but I found, with the same method of measurement, a density-difference of 100 between
two novels written at few years’distance Pendennis (1850 : D : 287) and Henry Esmond (1852 : D : 186) (Arnaud
1973 : 603) : when we remember Thackeray’s fairly extensive use of the progressive in his correspondence, we must
admit that he deliberately abstained in his historical novels from the modernization this form implied.
Historical stories or folkloric plays, etc., even by people who really know the language of the common folks , but are
not professional linguists, are inevitably bound to be distorted : observations on the negro dialect in Mark Twain ‘s
Huckleberry Finn, on Bernard Shaw’s cockney in Pygmalion, and other imitations, are instructive of the refraction
through the prism of literature ( Labov, Lecture at the Maison des Sciences Humaines in Paris, 20-2-1986). 107 This
is partly due to ignorance and false notions of language, even from highly intelligent people.108
There is always an element of parody in local colour, which explains why such attempts are seldom successful,
except when explicitly presented as parodies, as in the case of cocoliche (Italianized Spanish) plays once popular in
Buenos Aires.109
This is not the only situation when something else than pronunciation or vocabulary can be used for literary effects.
Guillemin-Flescher 1977, 1981 was mostly concerned with a comparison of the French and the English approach to
syntax and semantics when she studied the translations into English of some of Flaubert’s works. But, admittedly,
his use of the imparfait − something as exotic to the English-speaking readers as the progressive to the French − is
highly elaborated.
107
In French, we can mention George Sand's novels (La Mare au Diable, François le Champi, Le Meunier
d'Angibault), where country folks from Berry, in central France, speak a somewhat fictional dialect.
108
Jean d'Ormesson, de l'Académie française, and a brilliant writer, in his attacks of the suggested spelling reform,
used an extraordinary argument: "people won't be able to read Corneille in the text". Who ever does ? There is
practically no edition of the Cid with the original spelling, and what about Rabelais or François Villon? Publishers
know what the sales would be.
109
They are no more accurate than stage-Irish.
86
Raybould 1957 studied Jane Austen’s progressives in some detail, but not their frequency compared to that of
contemporaries ; nor did Phillipps 1970 : 111 sq., in his long and penetrating comments on Raybould’s article. The
present research adds this dimension to the debate. It seems likely that Jane Austen had found in the modern form
something worth her attention.110
The most obvious fact noted by Raybould and Phillipps is the number of progressive to-infinitives : for a total
number of 292 progressives in her letters, there are 11 infinitives. This corresponds to a density of 8.16 against a
general density for the same periods (up to 1819) of only 2.11 in which she is included. Even allowing for the
difficult rejection of the null hypothesis with small figures, there is no doubt that she was particularly addicted to
progressive infinitives, as the studies covering also her novels had noted. On the other hand, there is no occurrence
in the letters of present participle progressives like the concert being just opening, or the extraordinary their being
going to be married (in Sense and Sensibility) − in fact a nominalization, which could nevertheless be included in a
“ squish ” next to the progressive.
Next, we have what has been called the “ extended present ” in IV.2., which, in the language of the time more than
now, looks both directions like Janus : towards the future or towards the past. In fact, there are four ways of
referring to the near future, even in our time :1. the simple present (we leave to-morrow) ; 2. the progressive present
(we are leaving to-morrow) ; 3. the going to expressions (we are going to take a house) ; 4. the be to form, which
was very common at the beginning of the 19th century, especially with Jane Austen, and seems now obsolescent. Did
she also use 2, now very common ? The answer is no. She refers to the extended present in the direction of the past
by using the perfect associated with just, but to refer to the immediate future she usually makes use of the be to
phrase. As Phillipps very aptly says : “ These constructions, of the type, ‘John is to come home at once’, are
common, of course, in present English ; but she uses them more widely. It is easy to find parallels today for the use
in the sense of what is preordained or arranged. ” Phillips 1970 : 137. But he goes on to say that there are other
cases when the best gloss would be : is about to or is likely to. This interesting discussion cannot be developed here,
so the important remark is that we find no example in Jane Austen’s Letters of the progressive with immediate future
reference. For the same period, from the end of the 18th century up to 1817, 21 progressives of this type have been
found in the letters of many writers, from Maria Edgeworth to Keats − the latter will increase his contribution
noticeably in the following years −, Scott giving the highest number. In this respect, Jane Austen was still writing in
the language of the 18th century, and, when future reference was meant without the modal overtones of be to, she
relied on the context or the situation, especially with terminative verbs, to make it clear, and used the simple form :
On Thursday Mr and Mrs Bridges return to Danbury, Miss Harriet Hales accompanies them to London ; We dine
today at Goodwestone ; Martha comes, and a ball there must be ; Mrs Busby drinks tea and plays at cribbage here
to morrow ; if the weather permits, Eliza and I walk into London this morning, etc.
The now common going to forms were not part of this research, regrettably perhaps. They don’t seem to have been
used by Jane Austen. Their development becomes conspicuous only later, with some ambiguities, and the occasional
use of come instead of go. Another point which both Raybould and Phillipps have noted is her using the progressive
(“ expanded tenses ”) when the “ durative aspect of the verb, now normally conveyed by the expanded tense, is
severely limited, implicitly or explicitly, by some circumscribing of the time in the context ” Phillipps 1970 : 111.
This is what we call explicitly bounded duration, sometimes considered as incompatible with the progressive (see
above IV.4). 26 cases have been found in the corpus for the same period when Jane Austen wrote, 4 of them in her
letters. Such small figures hardly allow generalization but still, the compared densities, 1.05 and 2.97 tend to show
that the observations of the two analysts are founded. As a matter of fact, such use seems to increase later on, since
there are 204 occurrences in the whole of our corpus. This corresponds to a density of 2.11, clearly above the
general figure for periods 1-5 (up to 1819), but still below Jane Austen’s. This again can be a clue to her
experimenting with the new form consciously − which is likely in her case − or unconsciously. The question
whether this was a transfer into her letters from her novels, or, in the opposite direction, a transfer from her own
speech, oral or written, is a difficult one and beyond proof. The most likely is that there was feedback both ways,
with the restriction that, careful as she was to differentiate her characters by their language, not one among them
really spoke her own. This − and a supplementary reason for the above development − is the clearest case in our
study when reality and fiction can sometimes be fused and confused.
110
On this question, see also Strang 1982.
87
V.2.
Trajectories
Jane Austen’s letters, as well as her novels, cover a brief period, 20 years including all, but in fact only 10 with an
acceptable corpus size for the letters ; much less, 6 years, for the novels (1811-1817), which on the contrary provide
a comfortable size. Two observations can be made about Figure 34 : 1. The overall density figure for the novels
(from 216 to 400) is much greater than for the letters (217). Only Pride and Prejudice (1813), Mansfield Park
(1814) and Emma (1816) have been surveyed, with the following results : P&P, 235 ; MP, 390 ; E, 404. Not only
is there a remarkable increase over three years only, but we reach the stupendous figure of 400, never found
elsewhere. 2. Due to corpus size, the longitudinal values for the letters may want significance. They nevertheless
show an increase from approximately 160 to around 300. If we rely on this token, we may explain this less acute rise
in two ways : 1. Jane Austen’s novels contain a lot of dialogue, which encourages use of the progressive, especially
for character-building as said above. It could be studied more precisely in the direction opened by Raybould 1957
and Strang 1982 ; 2. the novelist was satisfied with the effects she had obtained with that form, which was a novelty
for her and her readers in such situations, and she was encouraged to enhance it. This remark would be stressing the
amount of conscious or partly conscious elaboration which separates the literary works from the everyday prose of
private letters.
The comparison between letters and literary works should be more rewarding with many others who have had a long
career. Only a few glimpses have been found possible within the limits of the present study. With reference to the
first romantic “ generation ”, the attempt could be worthwhile for Walter Scott, since his letters are fairly abundant,
and his novels as well ; but with the important reservation that, being often historical novels, they cannot be a mere
reflection of his own usage : cf. Tulloch 1980.
The second period, that of people born after 1800, is a better field, with the great early-Victorian novelists and their
abundant production in both fiction and letter-writing. To them could be added Carlyle and Macaulay, with prose
works of a different type, but where progressives can find place.
Macaulay is an interesting case. After a volume of Essays, critical and historical (1843), his famous History of
England from the accession of James the Second was written and published in successive volumes between 1848 and
1861 (after his death in 1859). Figure 35 is a comparison of the densities in letters and historical works. It shows
clearly that the development of the progressive in the narrative historical works is parallel to the development in
Macaulay’s Letters, but at a lower level, which is not surprising. It is important to stress that Macaulay’s works are
homogeneous and have never been considered as particularly modern in tone ; he was one of the strong opponents
of the new passive, and makes extensive use of the old one : while innocent blood was shedding under the forms of
justice, the new Parliament met ”( History I) ; “ while the foulest judicial murder ... was perpetrating, a tempest burst
forth ” (History II ), etc.
Carlyle’s French Revolution, published in 1837, but actually written before 1835 and rewritten after that date 111
shows a density of 180, a high figure for the time, and considerably higher than in Macaulay’s Essays seven years
later. There must be two reasons for this : 1. Carlyle had even begun writing it in Scotland, under the influence of
his native Scots dialect ; 2. It is much more than a plain narrative in Macaulay’s fashion ; it reads indeed like a
novel, at least as full of emotion as Dickens’s Tale of two cities also about the French Revolution. Nevertheless, the
historical narrative displays a much smaller density than the letters : 180 against 286 for the latter at the same stage
of the author’s life. Perhaps a parallel could be tried for at least some of the other works of the famous essayist :
but, whereas his correspondence reads like that of any man of the time, his literary style is far from straightforward
and fluent.
111
One of the most extraordinary cases of a precious MS entirely destroyed, at a time when the only way to keep a
duplicate was to have it hand-copied. Carlyle had lent it to Stuart Mill, whose servant inadvertently threw it into the
fire. Refusing a generous offer of money from his friend Mill, a rich man, Carlyle had to write it again from
memory. This may account for the exceptional spirit of this work, full of historical errors, but the best "poem" on the
French Revolution ever written.
88
V.3.
Chronological groups
We have seen that, in the case of Jane Austen and despite her short career, there is some parallel between the density
increase in novels and in letters. This was an occasion to remark, however, the distortion between works of art and
actual everyday practice, oral or written. Even the dialogue in novels, seen by Strang 1982 as the best reference,
cannot be entirely relied on : yet, its inspection, possibly with the modern facilities offered by scanning, could be
rewarding. A pilot study (Arnaud 1973 : 604) of 1000 progressives in a random sample of dialogue in novels
revealed densities very similar to those of correspondence or slightly higher112.
Ideally, some insight could be obtained by comparison either with works of fiction or other narrative works,
randomly selected along the century, or with a corpus of such works by the letter-writers themselves. Unfortunately,
this is not feasible, for want of suitable material. In the first “ generation ” surveyed, there are only three writers of
narrative fiction : Maria Edgeworth, Walter Scott and Jane Austen. We have seen that the latter’s novels mirror
everyday speech in a very special, Austenian, way. In the case of Maria Edgeworth, it’s the corpus of letters which
is comparatively thin. Walter Scott could provide a substantial corpus, the long line of his Waverley Novels on
library shelves ; but most are historical novels, which means that it is difficult to control what is early nineteenth
century language, or the supposed language of the time of Ivanhoe for example, and what is anachronic confusion
(on such points, see Tulloch 1980). This is not to say that the study is uninteresting with reference to the techniques
of novel-writing. Then the bulk of our letter-writers for that period are poets, who, with the exception of Southey
with his History of the Peninsular War, etc. wrote little narrative prose likely to contain a number of occurrences
sufficient for a statistical survey.
The second chronological group, on the contrary, lived in the golden age of the novel. Studying either random
samples chronologically ordered, or well-chosen individual works, could be rewarding for an overall view
confirming or supplementing, or perhaps contradicting what is found in the letters. This would be a huge task, for
which the present one can provide a pattern. Arnaud 1973 gives some elements for a chronology of novels published
between 1841 (Dickens’s The Curiosity Shop) and 1868 (William Collins’s The Moonstone) but, for that interval of
27 years only, it does not show significant increase, even when historical novels are excluded from the list.
Another form of assessment is to compare the chronology of the letters and the chronology of the other prose works.
We have seen that Jane Austen displays an increase in novels paralleled in her letters ; which is unlikely to be due to
chance. Carlyle, Macaulay, Mrs. Gaskell, Thackeray, Dickens and George Eliot have all published volumes of prose
at successive points of their existence. A parallel is then possible to confirm or disconfirm whether the increasing
use of the progressive in the correspondence is found also in the other prose works. Again, this would be an
immense task, and only a few examples will be given here.
Among the numerous novels of Charles Dickens, Arnaud 1973 studied only two landmarks : The Curiosity Shop
1841 and Our Mutual Friend 1865, that is about the two extremes of the novelist’s career. Here is the comparison of
the densities with that in Dickens’ Letters :
1841 The Curiosity Shop : 266 ; Letters (1840-44) :266 [sic] ;
1865 Our Mutual Friend : 261 ; Letters (1865-69) : 379.
Whereas there is conspicuous increase in the letters, the density in the two novels is stable. A longitudinal study
including a larger number of works might perhaps suggest the reasons for this, with due allowance to the variety of
parameters and to the statistical significance of the figures. A Tale of two cities (1859), a historical picture of the
French Revolution, with a density of 190, betrays once more that the modernization of style brought about by the
progressive was deliberately excluded from historical narratives (with the notable exception of G.Eliot’s Romola :
see above ). As a matter of fact, this is also supported by the low figure for Charles Kingsley’s historical novel
Westward Ho (1855) : 173.
Within the limits of the present work, apart from Jane Austen, the most interesting parallel between letters and
literature proper is probably to be found with Mrs. Gaskell. Using a count made by Evelyne Tessier 1980
(Université Paris VII dissertation, unpublished), the densities for 5 novels (Mary Barton, 1848 ; Cranford, 1853 ;
North and South 1855 ; Cousin Phillis, Wives and Daughters, 1865) have been put side by side with those for the
112
At the time, it was based on separate samples of progressive and non-progressive tokens.
89
letters to her daughter Marianne at their respective periods : Figure 36. Two novels belong to the same period and
their density values have been fused as well as those for the letters. The curve for the novels shows a regularly
ascending line from 220 to 375 between 1848 and 1865, without the depression for the early sixties which, as we
have suggested, may be due to a coldness in her relations with her daughter, also reflected in the fact that her letters
were less frequent and/or shorter. That difference could support the hypothesis (see above in III.1.4.b and Figure
12), since there is little probability that her private feelings should be reflected in the novels as clearly as in the
letters.
Should such comparative observations be confirmed for other writers, George Eliot for example, their credibility
would be enhanced. Statistical tests only tell us when the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, not that it must be
accepted.
Linguists non longer rely only on the language of “ good writers ” for the description, aside from prescriptive rules,
of community grammars113. Socially-oriented linguists would fain write “ communities ” in the plural (Georgian and
Early Victorian grammars for example, to account for social strata and linguistic geography, etc.). At the same time,
it would be ridiculous to discard the lessons of literary works, for a variety of reasons, including the admiration we
have for them and the influence they have had. The above remarks and observations point to directions which could
be explored further, and contribute to bridge the unfortunate gap between the social and language sciences and what
still belongs with the humanities.
GENERAL CONCLUSION
The present survey was undertaken with the hope of providing insights on the progressive in Romantic times, and
more generally on historical developments : yet, trying to conclude with more than suggestions would certainly be
overambitious. What can be done in “ the art of making the best use of bad data ” − the task of historical linguistics
according to Labov − can be summarized under three heads : observations, generalizations, principles (Labov 1994 :
12). Observations are already a construction of facts on the basis of the quantitative data ; generalizations are an
attempt to go beyond them to unveil some of the particular rules they may illustrate ; as to principles, they go further
beyond by questioning some accepted premises of linguistic theory. The further we go from observations and facts,
the less assured is our progress and the more likely our suggestions to be challenged.
As already said, our observations cannot claim to be entirely innocent of preliminary theorizing, open or covert. It
was also emphasized that this theorizing should not be too rigid, and was supposed to be acceptable by a large
number of the linguists who have studied the progressive and its history : hence the comparatively unsophisticated
outline in I.2.
As stated in the introduction, the guidelines of the research were those of Empirical foundations for a theory of
language change (Weinreich et al. 1968), a critical overview of the major theories of diachronic evolution. The five
problems (constraints, transition, embedding, evaluation, actuation), which the authors kept separate for the sake of
Cartesian methodology, are often linked or overlapping : in the field of grammar for example, it is sometimes
difficult to distinguish constraints and embedding, transition and actuation ; and evaluation can generate new social
constraints.
Many discussions have taken place since that landmark was set, especially around the actuation-transition problems,
and grammaticalization has recently been on the foreground (Traugott & Heine (eds.) 1991 ; Pagliuca (ed.) 1994). In
113
This view of good usage is typically represented for French grammars by Vaugelas's Remarques sur la langue
française (1647) and the Belgian Maurice Grevisse, whose Le Bon Usage (1936) has been reprinted many times.
Grammars of English have commonly followed the same practice, less avowedly; Jespersen's A Modern English
Grammar..., for example, refers to an extensive bibliography of writings.
90
connection with the progressive, this raises interesting questions, which the present survey may help to answer, as to
the nature of grammaticalization : is it merely an internal process or should we also take external factors into
account, were it only that of learnability, implying psychological considerations ? Even when internal parameters
only are considered, how should the process be described ? Finally, what can be said about the time of its
development, its duration and stages, and the local and historical conditions (internal or external).
No more than a summary discussion will be attempted here.
The classical type of grammaticalization involves lexical items becoming grammatical. It can be applied to the
progressive as part of a study of auxiliaries, since they all derive from main verbs : yet, what can be comparatively
clear for modals can send us to very remote periods indeed with reference to primary auxiliaries. However, if a
limited historical period is considered, the question can be seen as mostly syntactical, beginning with description of
the movement from one type of organization to another
If the description is correct, does it mean that the explanation will follow, or can simply be dispensed with ?
Among recent efforts to shed some light on the development of the auxiliary system in the Modern English period
(18th and early 19th century), Warner’s (1993, 1995, 1997) are noteworthy.114 He sees the development of the
progressive passive − the clearest case of innovation in our survey − as a predictable element of the overall system of
auxiliaries undergoing complete transformation in the course of the 18th century. Since predictability is one of the
challenges often presented to linguists, this is a bold stand. He does not take into account external constraints which
may have either encouraged or censured the move. We know that the new passive form was repeatedly stigmatized
(see above IV.4.1) : this certainly explains why it took so long to become settled ; the present survey shows clearly
how the two forms went on side by side. It also shows that the logic of everyday users − of the enlightened class,
including professional grammarians − is not necessarily that which governs the investigations of modern linguists,
nor the formal systems they apply to language. Warner’s arguments are strong enough, however, at the same time
as cautious, and we may admit that the conditionings he describes were sufficient to justify the, to his mind
inevitable, development. 115 Social factors would only have affected the rate of its diffusion.
One of his points is that the change affecting the auxiliaries was connected : 1. with the decline of thou,especially in
addressing children − although he confesses that we have too little information on the spoken language to warrant
this − with consequent loss of inflectional categories in auxiliaries ; 2. in “ the virtual going to completion of
periphrastic DO”. On that second point, Nurmi 1996 concluded that, for the period 1590-1620 at least, no evidence
can be found to support it. Yet the question remains open and should not be discarded. This calls for further
quantitative research in extended corpora: on this point, see also Kroch 1989 and Tieken-Boon van Ostade 1987.
Then, the connection between the developments affecting the progressive and the BE/HAVE variation with
intransitives (Rydén and Brörstrom 1987) certainly requires new attention.
Finally, the history of the progressive from its beginnings, the subject of Mossé’s description, could probably shed
some light even on its modern “ not solely aspectual meanings ” ( Hancil 2000; Smitterberg 2002).
114
However, the lexicalist approach is perhaps too apt to generate ad hoc formulations : subcategorizations (e.g. of
-ing as progressive or not, (+PRD) or (-PRD)) etc. are justified in terms of distributional properties only. Then the
concept of learnability (connected to Lightfoot' s “transparency principle”)does not seem to be thoroughly grounded
on psycholinguistic observations, and evokes the old “parent-child” model of language change, even if some
assumptions seem reasonable. This could open a long discussion.
115
Another reservation would concern his corpus, mostly relying on Visser and also, often, on Jane Austen. The
former is certainly a reliable source, but it could be extended; the latter, as I have found, (see above in V) is
probably suspect: she was an experimenter, and comparison of her novels and her letters shows that both are
somehow idiosyncratic, interesting in any case, but to what extent representative of community use, we don't know.
Rydèn & Brörstrom 1987 have also shown that writers (and this probably applies, more generally, to people) can be,
often erratically, either conservative or progressive; or even innovative. Idiolects need further exploration: Jane
Austen's original usage can be a good starting point, illustrating the possible role of individual women in language
innovation and change.
91
Such points were not the object of the present research: yet the data provided may eventually help in their study.
Heine 1994 studied the grammaticalization of the progressive in Ewe, a language of West Africa. Although we have
to be cautious in applying the label “ progressive ” to a number of analogous forms in many languages, such
comparisons can be illuminating (Arnaud 2000 ). He notes, to the satisfaction of the present writer, that “ the
grammaticalization of locative constructions as verbal aspect categories is not confined to Ewe, rather it is observed
world-wide, it forms in fact the most common pattern of evolving new progressive aspects ”, “ ... It is well known
that in many, if not all, languages, spatial expressions are metaphorically employed to conceptualize temporal
notions...location in space also serves to express temporary states, contingent situations and progressivity (cf. Comrie
1976 : 98ff) ”. He gives a table of the most common schemas serving as the source for progressives, the first of
which is quite in agreement with the suggestions in I.2. (Heine 1994 : 268-269) :
“ X is at Y ” ( Location schema) gloss : “ he is at/in/on eat-ing ”.
Forgetting for a moment the very concept of grammaticalization we have to ask ourselves what was exactly the type
of change evidenced by the present survey. A complete coverage of the question implies a wider approach. Among
the queries, one is fairly classical : the language or the language users, which is foremost ? This is another way of
formulating the dichotomy of langue v. parole in Saussure’s Cours. The survey indisputably puts the users in front,
an approach which does not preclude the formal approach, with the potentialities of change present in the user’s
minds under the once popular name of competence.
Among the difficulties we have the fact, which entails a serious hitch along the road to predictability, that the
potentialities suggested can lead to diverse routes : “ spaghetti junctions ” for example, etc. So that the linguistic
field can be compared to a gigantic web, where the future generations will surf, no one dares to say which way. A
limited idea of such a web was suggested by Lloyd Anderson 1975 for the semantic space of get, have and be : the
latter two are connected to the progressive, as we know. To put things differently, linguistic structures have some
capacities of assuming new shapes (but they are more like the physics of soft materials than that of stones), and we
are often in a position to say what these shapes cannot be, but not what they will necessarily be.
This is possibly where Meillet comes in, when he links linguistic change to social change. This − and the above
remarks − certainly sounds like a commonplace to many linguists, yet it seems to have been frequently overlooked
or even censured. The case of the passive progressive discussed above is perhaps a case in point : was it as
inevitable as Warner thinks ? It would be an interesting task to list predictable changes which eventually did not
happen : the blind alleys of historical linguistics.
If the transition problem is difficult, but can be cleared by careful observations, the actuation problem which is
connected to it is far more formidable, since it puts the question of causality. In the perspectives of Empirical
foundations, the causality of language change is not seen as purely systemic but is referred to structured
heterogeneity within the socio-cultural matrix. This emphasis on sociology, usually stressing the communicative
function of language, was already, especially in France, typical of the early 20th century which saw the birth of
modern sociology. Other possible causes, often favoured before, were entirely discarded, such as psychology in
general : Cf. Hugo Schuchardt’s criticism of Saussure’s Cours (Normand & al. 1978, 174-181), particularly
concerning Saussure’s dichotomies of langue /parole and synchrony/diachrony which Schuchardt thinks are in fact
only one ; or imitation, so dear to Gabriel de Tarde 1895 ; or even climate, etc. As a matter of fact, sociology itself
was taken in a very general sense : Meillet speaks of “ social change ” without qualification. After a debate lasting
for almost a century, and the victory of structuralism, are we not entitled to adopt a more tolerant view ? Why
should we exclude any cause or factor a priori ?
The constraints problem and the embedding problem are more familiar to linguists, insofar at least as only the
linguistic environment is concerned, and familiar to society-oriented linguists, when external factors are taken into
account. Clearly, the research frame presented in I.3 was conceived for the purpose of measuring the comparative
influence of both groups of factors, on the basis of experience and the observations of a great many people who have
studied the progressive, mostly with reference to present-day British or American English.
We shall now try to sum up the results of the quest, observing what can be reasonably taken for certainty and what is
still subject to various degrees of uncertainty.
1. .A considerable increase of the density.
92
All the figures confirm that the frequency of the progressive in the type of discourse studied increased considerably
and steadily. There is some reason to think that it paralleled the increase in spoken English, and that it also extended
− with possible different rates and modalities, worth surveying (Smitterberg 1998, 2002) − to other strata, where
density, being smaller, requires a larger volume of material ; this, except, perhaps, for the study of tokens of oral
speech, would not considerably alter the general picture. It is also quite probable that this development originated in
the language of the lower orders of society, but little is known of the way it spread across the various geographical
dialects, apart from the accepted fact that the Celtic dialects of Ireland and Scotland were noted for their addiction to
it.116 It is also likely that their influence was felt in the North West counties in country dialects, such as in the Lake
district as we have assumed, and that the large number of Irish and Scottish immigrates, many of them, especially the
women, introduced into the Victorian homes as servants, contributed to its development in city dialects. The reasons
for the development of the progressive in Anglo-Celtic dialects are beyond the scope of the present work. 117
It is also difficult to say whether this influence originated the movement in modern English, or merely reinforced it.
This is part of the actuation problem discussed below. Let’s just remember that Irish and Scottish immigration
became significant only by the eighteen forties, when, as we can see, the movement had already been launched : so
that the hypothesis of reinforcement seems more likely to be right.
2. Density and degrees of formality
The progressive has been shown in a previous survey (Arnaud 1973) to occur at different frequencies across the
strata or genres arrayed in order of formality, and was more common in the less formal strata. Within the more
homogeneous domain of epistolary writings, we notice a subordinate order of formality, uniting the less formal
language of women in general and the degrees of intimacy for both men and women. This confirms that the less
formal a discourse, the more likely it is that it contains a high density of progressives : another instance of
parallelism between the conventional social scale of speech and what is studied under the label of style or register.
3. The weight of linguistic factors
The study of the purely linguistic factors required considerable effort, especially in distinguishing predication
classes. Some aspects of the change which could be hypothesized, and have been long documented in most cases,
are confirmed : from the increasing use with state verbs to the nearly complete substitution of the new passive to the
old one, we can only enrich the existing knowledge with significant figures. But the predication classes do not
display distributional differences sufficient to reject the null hypothesis : the conclusion must be that this influence
is a slower process, too slow to be measured accurately with the methods used here. We have to be satisfied with
plausible hints which a more extensive review over a longer period should confirm and qualify. 118
116
So far as I know, historical dialectology (cf. Görlach, 1988: 218) does not give us much information on this
account, mostly because of lack of evidence on the spoken usage and familiar writings. Mossé (1938:35-36)
suggests that the progressive, between the 13th and the 15th century, spread from the North to the South through the
Central Midlands. Mustanoja (1960) and Nehls (1974) also noticed that it was more common in the North in the
Middle-English period. Cf. also Nurmi (1996: 157; 1999: 65).
117
They must not be very different from the virtualities existing in English proper, except that verbal nouns are a
prominent feature in Gaelic, thus encouraging the periphrastic development. Mossé, however, did not think that the
influence of Gaelic was at the origin of the "periphrastic form" in English. He also believed that the English phrases
due to the influence of Celtic in the English of Celtic areas (Scotland, the "Pale" in Ireland) did not penetrate into
English, and that the influence of Celtic dialects was not necessary to reinforce the development : Mossé 1938, p.66.
Cf. also Arnaud, 1998, 142-43.
118
Not all people will accept the semantic classification given here, nor the ascription of individual items to a given
class or subclass: it seems unlikely that a different choice would lead to more convincing results.
93
4. Lexical diffusion.
Does the development affect all the lexical system at once or is there some sort of lexical diffusion ?(III, 2.3.) This is
another point about which no firm conclusion can be drawn : the study of vocabulary is full of thorns. Vocabulary
increases with length of text : new words (new verbs in the present case) are added each time you extend it. A
binary study of verbs that take or do not take the progressive at the successive periods would therefore be tempting,
but the task is formidable and elusive : new verbs occur erratically according to needs, so that it is only by
considering classes as we did that quantitative measurement is possible. One of the observations, however (already
made in the computing for Arnaud 1973) is that the new verbs in a new section of text usually belong to the class of
processes and that the enrichment may consist of any item of the corresponding lexicon, with a preference for
unbounded processes, which refers us again to the distribution of classes. The addition of new state verbs to the list
of those accepting the progressive is a well-known fact, but there are too few occurrences of each for a significant
quantitative study.
5. Explanations and principles
The lessons which can be drawn from this extensive corpus are only tentative with respect to causality. Many, if not
all, of the current hypotheses concerning the linguistic conditioning and modalities of the development in modern
English are undoubtedly supported by the quantitative observations. The progressive has been gaining ground over
the verb paradigm and its lexical and semantic constituents, in the direction which apparently tends to eliminate
many of the original barriers. It would not be taking a great risk to say that, in 21st century English, even
performative utterances will be affected, even verbs like know or belong − there are already some symptoms ; this,
of course, implying modernized semantics. Unless the trend be reversed, which is always possible, though unlikely
for the short term. In quantitative terms, it is however difficult to measure with precision the influence of purely
linguistic factors, as we have seen even with the verb classes covering a large number of items.
Unfortunately, it was not found possible for this exploration to take into account all contextual or situational factors
beyond the limits of the sentence and even of the main clause : they obviously play a role, sometimes considerable,
but it is not easily submitted to quantitative analysis .119 The typology of clauses is a complicated matter, and a term
like situation refers to a number of occasions which can better be apprehended in oral contemporary discourse, or
even in modern texts with the help of contemporary speakers’ elicitations and reflections. The case is slightly better
if we rely on the formal parts of the sentence proper, but it probably requires a larger corpus, and a longer period, to
attain a satisfactory degree of reliability.
With reference now to the sociostylistic concept of degrees of formality, the short term development is shown with
convincing evidence to be strongly connected to the two factors investigated : gender and intimacy.
Our reflection on this with respect to principles and to causality can take two directions, one suggested by what we
may know of diachronic processes in general, the other has to be so to say “ invented ”, since it carries us to littleexplored paths.
a. Long term and short term
Concerning diachronic processes, it is perhaps artificial but practical at least to separate long-term trends and shortterm developments. The discussions about long-term “ drift ” are as old as historical linguistics, but fairly well
documented, and we may reasonably admit that the birth and development of the progressive (including semantic
change) are not outside the grasp of diachronicians, provided they use the appropriate tools for it. This is a general
change that affects the very foundations of the verb system, and which can be apprehended only at a high level of
107 Strang 1982, Wright 1994a and Smitterberg 1998, among others, have rightly taken clausal distribution into
account. The subtleties of the arrangement of discourse have been studied by Guillemin-Flescher 1977. Often, the
reference system is only indirectly present in the sentence, since no utterance is entirely independent of what was
said or thought before (presupposition or Culioli's préconstruit). In some of the points developed in IV, the analysis
extends clearly beyond the clause or the sentence proper.
94
abstraction. 120 The discussions around Aristotle’s views are in the right direction if they take care not to abstract
from the actual use of the language too beautiful logical models, which sometimes happens even with ordinary
language philosophy. In this particular case, analysts have a problem of equilibrium, since the gap is very wide
between the abstract and sophisticated discussion on the concepts related to aspect and the careful study of actually
attested utterances.
b. Internal and external explanations
In a clear overview, Heine 1994 : 254-259 opposed two types of explanations, internal and external : “ According to
the former, phenomena are explained exclusively with reference to and within the domain to which they belong,
while according to the latter, explanations are sought outside the relevant domain, i.e., they are derived from
independently motivated principles. ” He adds that “ There is a growing consensus that internal explanations are
weaker than external ones... and indeed, according to some, internal explanations are not explanations at all, that is,
true explanations are by nature external ones ”. Among many who took sides in the debate, Givon 1979 :3-4 is
specifically mentioned as providing “ perhaps the mots exhaustive and relevant catalogue of “ strongly explanatory
parameters ” :... “ 1. propositional content, 2. discourse pragmatics, 3. the processor, 4. cognitive structure, 5.
world-view pragmatics, 6. ontogenetic development, 7. diachronic change, 8. phylogenetic evolution. ” While it is
not certain that the catalogue is complete, one can see that the discussion here takes some of these points into
account, possibly adding new perspectives.
In this debate, which reminds one of the distinction of analytic (deductive, syllogistic) and synthetic (inductive)
judgements in classical logic, one will not be surprised to see a socially-oriented linguist side with Heine. But it is
perhaps just an article of faith, and it is reasonable to admit that the two types can be complementary, whatever we
mean by explanation, and the strength of it.
c. Some possible external causes
One of the founders of structural linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure, never proposed a satisfactory solution to his
own paradox : la langue, a social entity, was conceived as a completely autonomous system. It is not sufficiently
known that, at the time when, following Durkheim’s discovery of the specificity of the fait social, Saussure insisted
on the specificity of la langue, he was also exposed to the ideas of another very influential social scientist, Gabriel de
Tarde. Tarde accounted for social phenomena in terms of interpsychologie, with imitation as the main vehicle of
diffusion in many domains, including language. So that linguistic innovations could be propagated in the same way
as fashion in dress, hairdo or furniture. Tarde’s suggestion was promptly ostracized by the early sociologists ; yet it
was at least an attempt to solve the mystery of the interface between the individual and the group, especially in trying
to account for historical developments. La langue as a social entity was seen by Saussure as a product : nothing was
said of its production. This is why it has been said that Saussure’s parole must be the locus of diachrony.
Dorozewski, 1933 (see Norman et al. 1978, 105) believed that the concept owed a lot to Tarde’s views. What is its
mode of existence we don’t really know, but it can only be of a dialogic nature.
If external influences are not excluded as a matter of principle, several explanations can then be suggested for the
type of development we are surveying.
The simplest is Hermann Paul’s avalanche effect. The movement, once started, gains momentum, and we find the
typical S curve of diffusion. Nobody has been completely satisfied with this since it looks like just description, and
can hardly be justified or falsified.
Then we have societal change (from Meillet 1921 to Guy 1990). Undoubtedly, the period we have surveyed (17801880) was one of considerable societal change (the French Revolution, the Napoleonic wars, the Industrial
revolution, etc.) and, without further precision we could leave it at that, just as a qualification of the avalanche effect.
A side-aspect but an important one of societal change is when it induces contact phenomena. In this respect it is not
impossible that Anglo-Celtic dialects, Irish English especially, had an influence (see above) . Massive Irish
immigration began only by the 1840s (the railways navvies were often Irish), but even before that time, there were
120
In terms of generative grammar it is not a low-level rule, but among the first, involving primary auxiliaries.
95
many Irish nannies and Scottish gardeners in the homes : they may have sold some of their speech habits to the
children and their mothers : cf. Labov 1990 : 219, quoting Gauchat 1905.
Yet, again, why should avalanche and societal change so strongly affect some variables and not others ? The same
could be said of Tarde’s imitation and fashion in language habits : it could however justify a renewed approach to
style, applied to all types of discourse in a diachronic perspective. Even in everyday conversation, extensive use of
progressives might well be one of the symptoms or indices of the change from Augustan and Regency English, to
what would become Victorian English : it was felt , at variable degrees of consciousness, to be more modern.
Notice that in this respect, valuation tends to contradict stigmatization in the everlasting conflict between
generations, the younger people adoring what the seniors burnt. We will then have to look for the reasons of this
new, often perhaps unconscious or at least implicit, valuation.
d. Psycho-historical considerations.
It is certainly more daring to suggest some connection between the semantics of the progressive and the sociohistorical conditioning of the change. This can be done by tentatively correlating the two concepts of womanhood
and intimacy on the basis of accepted psychological and sociological attributes.
It has been shown that the women in the survey consistently used progressive forms more frequently than the men :
wasn’t this perhaps a matter of the topics they favoured as suggested by a present-day survey of conversation in
Kipers (1987) ? The point would require closer examination but, at first sight, it does not seem to be the case
Intimacy − the opposite of distance − was a practical label to sort the letters into three classes. Renewing the
intuitive considerations of many older students of the progressive, perhaps it provides a clue to explain the growing
success of the progressive in Romantic times, especially with women. This would definitely contradict Eckert’s
(1989) views on the irrelevance of expressiveness to account for women’s share in language variation, but by
relating it to gender, not to sex, i-e. by referring it to more comprehensive characteristics.
Intimacy and distance are microsociological concepts, whereas other terms such as effusiveness and spontaneity run
the risk of circularity, since they refer to features that pertain to the text proper. Intimacy is a biographical fact,
although, as we said, it is often revealed by the letters : in historical research, we cannot ask the writers what their
real feelings are. The other labels refer more specifically to the reflection in the text of the relationships involved.
Undoubtedly, psychology intervenes. When we speak of intimacy between two people we mean more than the mere
fact of sharing the same house, the same bedroom or the same bed ; hence intimacy is ambiguous, both physical and
affective. Although it is not recommended, in scientific research, to deal with ambiguous concepts, the timehonoured metaphor in Saussure’s Cours suggests a possible resolution. The two sides of the ambiguity, the
sociological and the psychological, are somehow similar to those of his sheet of paper, and the still unsolved puzzle
of langue v. parole.
We are not dealing with the semantics of current lexical items − the meaning-shifts of a term like Romantic, for
example − , but with a formal morphosyntactic system of deep significance, all the more so because it is largely
unconscious. Its existential force has been emphasized in I.2.. Applied to the situation of letter-writing, it certainly
connotes the opposite of distance : if the present tense is used, it is a super-present, so to speak . From this derive
suggestions of warmth, sensibility, expressiveness, and all the subtle shades a writer like Jane Austen masterfully
introduced in her novels, but also found in the works of many other writers.
On the other hand, is there some connection between our analysis of the auxiliary system in I.2. and the extralinguistic modalities of its increase ? At a superficial level, a term like spontaneity has been suggested. It may help
to encompass the two sections of the sociolinguistic study, which is, indeed, suffused with popular psychology. The
link is, one has to confess it, that women are supposed to be more spontaneous than men 121, more sentimental
perhaps, people say, to provoke feminists who will have it that the difference has been forced upon women.
This extreme feminist view is clearly opposed to what is known of the image of the Victorian woman, an emblematic
socio-historical avatar of the condition of woman across the ages : (Basch 1979). We have to acknowledge that, at
121
Possibly, it is rather the aptitude to express their emotions, in speech or in writing, which differentiates women, as
recently suggested and documented by Braconnier 1996. This concerns the social psychology of the period: the
supposed coolness of British males, which the French called "le flegme", is sometimes felt in the written exchange.
Yet our Romantics are not very typical in this respect.
96
the very time when the feminist movement had already begun in Britain with Mary Wollstonecraft and later John
Stuart Mill, Harriet Martineau, etc., women as independent and militant as George Eliot and Elizabeth Gaskell were
far from refusing the traditional psychological attributes of femininity, and would not have found insulting the
picture illustrated in Ruskin’s Sesame and Lilies, for example. It would be anachronic to project on most Victorian
women our own ideology. If the suggestion of a link between gender (not sex : this is not just a concession to
feminists) and what is called spontaneity is judged irrelevant and even provoking, then we can take things the other
way round and say that the spontaneity which is also present in the intimate letters of men is an expression of
feminine gender in them.
Spontaneity is a term that somehow resists definition ; 122 it might be measured by the speed at which the pen ran on
the paper : writers often allude to scribbling with bad pens, or to the trickeries of ink, and editors note the erased
words, the blots, etc., characteristic of informal writing, at a time when writing tools were still very imperfect, and
paper easily scratched. Unfortunately, we can only judge of it indirectly. There are formal signals : erratic
punctuation, incomplete sentences, misspellings (Keats is famous for them), erased words, the desultory shifting
from one topic to another, exclamations, hesitations ; all tokens of that minimal distance defining intimacy.
Obviously, this is not a strict concept, especially when degrees have to be established, and its application is certainly
loose and questionable, as we said in the related section. Spontaneity is clearly connected with intimacy, although it
can be found with less intimate correspondents, and could certainly be divided into varieties. It is, in traditional
terms, a stylistic concept, and we may easily admit that “ every one to his own style ” : Macaulay’s spontaneity is of
a different kind from that of Thackeray, who was often joking, and George Eliot’s different from Mrs Gaskell’s,
who, in her everyday correspondence, was less intellectual, more newsy ; the two Scotsmen, Scott and Carlyle, also
had a different manner of addressing their intimate correspondents, the former usually relaxed, the latter − who so
often complained of bowels trouble −always ready to lecture his correspondents. It is an interesting journey into
human nature to read the letters of so remarkable people. To conclude, spontaneity is something that can rely on
internal and external evidence : formal indices or symptoms, on the one hand, and what we learn from biographies
and from the content of the letters themselves concerning human relations, on the other.
The research presented here clearly shows the process of the spread. What would be its responses to the questions
put forth by Labov (1982) ? For the short term, the constraints (or the motives) are psycho-sociological rather than
purely formal. It is quite possible that long-term drift and short-term change obey different rules ; or that a shorttime spurt is just surfing on the long wave of syntactic and semantic renewal. This would describe the actuation of
the change in this case : a reinforcement to which avalanche, overall societal change, dialectal and popular
influences may have contributed. The whole study illustrates the transition. Even though we should not exaggerate
its incidence (it never affects now more than 8 to 10 per cent of the total verb tokens), the progressive has become
part and parcel of the verb system, no longer an exceptional idiomatic phrase. Is this not a sort of revolution, a
modernization ? As to embedding, we see that, as usual, sociological factors converge with stylistic factors, with
the use of the progressive increasing in the lower strata. The evaluation problem was considered only incidentally,
but it is clear that prescriptive statements, negative as usual, did not inhibit the development, because it was an
insidious and quantitative novelty. The form had existed long before, only its spread could be censured, apart from
stereotypes.
We may also ask ourselves if our illustrious writers were just carried along by the tide, or if they actually led the
movement, and, if so, to what degree. The reading public was growing, and the influence may also have been
indirectly transferred through various channels. This point should certainly be studied more closely, not only in the
field of literature − many writers have insisted that they took their language lessons with the common people 123 −
but also in the more general way of reciprocal influence between the community and the intellectual and social élite.
Trying to discover such channels in the diffusion of the less conscious syntactic changes would be difficult, but
certainly as rewarding as in the better-known field of vocabulary.
122
Under the label spontaneous speech, Labov 1994, 157-8 includes casual and careful speech, as opposed to the
controlled styles used in reading. In letter-writing, this seems to apply as well, if we consider that there is a gradient,
with individual variations and degrees of intimacy. Writing − especially at the time and with such writers − does not
easily allow for the same casualness as speech, so that it is something between casual and careful expression.
123123
“One is not bound to respect the lazy obtuseness or snobbish ignorance of people who do not care to know
more of their native tongue than the vocabulary of the drawing-room and the newspaper”: George Eliot to Walter
W. Skeat, the famous dialectologist, in defence of her sometimes inaccurate use of the Midland dialect in Adam Bede
(North Staffordshire and Derbyshire) and Silas Marner (North Warwickshire)(1872).
97
The progressive and the romantic world-view
Are the actuation and diffusion observed just a contingent phenomenon, or is there a deeper connection with what the
progressive periphrasis embodies into the verb-system ? Answering this is going from mere description to the study
of causality. The following suggestions, in terms of external causality (cf. point 5 of Givon in b above), are then to
be taken with a pinch of salt, and some will certainly find them too bold.
Is it just a coincidence that the comparatively abrupt increase of the progressive is synchronous with the birth and
development of Romanticism ? This analytic form, we have seen, stresses existence with its concreteness in the
ever-changing, transitory picture of the world, just as John Robert Cozens, Constable and Turner’s landscapes are
dedicated to passing lights and clouds. In the classical age, time and nature seemed immutable, and events were
usually described by a verb-form sometimes ambiguous, but essentially synoptic. With the 18th century, a new
picture emerges, leading to a greater interest on the individual, whether this means things, events, or people. When
the speaker or the addressee are also the subjects of the sentence − the majority of cases − it goes with the new
emphasis on self. The coincidence is probably not fortuitous, and it can be at least surmised that the romantic
atmosphere − or should we say ideology ? After all, Kierkegaard was a Romantic − is not without influence on the
actuation of a sleeping virtuality of the system of English grammar. The French philosopher Georges Gusdorf 19821993 : 394, in his extensive and masterly study of Romanticism, dedicates long developments to the spatio-temporal
universe of the new age, as opposed to the epistemology of the classical age : “ la vérité intime de la conscience
humaine sert de modèle à la vérité des choses extérieures... A cet espace [l’espace kantien, toujours euclidien ], le
romantisme oppose un espace qualitatif, l’espace vécu de la présence ou de l’absence... Le temps est, comme
l’espace, un exposant de la présence humaine, en fonction de la succession des événements. ” [ the intimate truth of
human consciousness serves as the model to the truth of external things... In constrast to the kantian space, still a
euclidean space, the space of romanticism is qualitative, is the space of actual experience, of presence or absence...
Time, like space, is an exponent of the human presence, according to the succession of events ; my translation ]
124
This does not mean that it was limited to enlightened literate people : the reverse could be true. Enlightenment
was an intellectual phenomenon, the sentimental impulse was not. Wordsworth, the great novelists, and many others
of the contemporary intellectual elite, were interested in the common people.
The fact that the population surveyed consists of writers may have led to this “ literary ” interpretation, but it must be
stressed that romantic is understood here in a very comprehensive sense, as an atmosphere involving even the
illiterate masses : encompassing for example the sentimental current of religion (Evangelism, non-conformism of
various denominations including Methodists, Unitarians, Quakers, etc.) and the popular appeal of writers like
Dickens. Warm seems an appropriate metaphor to qualify the popular new form.
Stressing this expressive function, somehow neglected in the recent past, and referring to psychology is, obviously,
indulging in neo-Humboldtian linguistics. Wilhelm von Humboldt was a friend of Schiller, and also a product of the
Romantic age. He used the term Weltansicht (Humboldt 2000: 180), implying a less intellectualized view than
Weltanschauung — cf. B. L. Whorf’s famous theory of linguistic relativism (Whorf 1956: 263: A change in language
can transform our appreciation of the Cosmos.) Humboldt’s considerations have occasionally suggested some
ridiculous interpretations on the national character of individual languages. Yet, in the narrower line of historical
development which is ours — and was one of the major lines of Humboldt’s thought—, several students of the
progressive, as we have seen, often referring to not strictly present-day usage, have underlined its “ subjective force ”
( Curme 1930 : 374 ; Mossé 1938 : 274 ; Granville-Hatcher 1951 ; Charleston, 1960 ; Storms,1964 ) and several
others have more or less sensed it, at least as a by-product of its aspectual function (Scheffer, 1975 ; Strang,
1982 :449125). Studying the foregrounding function of the progressive, Wright 1994126 mentions some of the
124
Gusdorf remarks that British romanticism is in many ways specific, but this mostly applies to the literary sphere.
With reference to the universe of the British landscape painters, here is another typical observation from a very
different view-point : "both the Cotman and the Cox [watercolours] are typical products of the romantic period,
which showed people becoming more aware of their place in the natural world". C. Nugent, 1993, 63 (my italics).
To what extent are language forms and world view mutually conditioned is an old and fascinating question: cf.
Benjamin Lee Whorf 's studies of the Hopi , Whorf 1956, 263.
125
She suggests that the development of the progressive may explain the transition from the epistolary novel to the
modern novel: "what changes is the participation of the reader, who is made to feel as if he is seeing rather than
being told".
126
She believes that the subjectivity found in writings, even in letter-writing , may well be just a reflection of the
subjectivity always expressed in spoken form. Unfortunately, our historical investigations have to be concentrated
98
adjectives describing it in the extensive literature : emotive (Zandvoort), vivid (Jespersen), interpretative (Ljung
1977), phenomenal (Goldsmith & Woisetschlaeger 1976, 1982). These originally more or less intuitive judgments
can certainly be applied to the 19th century rise of the progressive, provided that the term subjective is taken to refer
not only to the subject of the sentence but to the speaker as well. The rate of the development of the progressive in
preromantic, romantic and industrial times is so high that it certainly required a strong drive. The psychosociological forces of the romantic mind may have provided at least some of it.
To resume a more professional discourse, we can repeat that traditional historical linguistics is certainly more
concerned with the long term than with the short term ; but is in fact most of the time concerned with the middleterm, that is of the order of several centuries. But, while avoiding the traps where some of the earlier comparativists
were caught, we are still aware that there are very long term trends of a general kind, diachronic universals : either
formal (for example the development of analytic after synthetic forms ; Cf. Robin Lakoff 1972 ), or of a more
abstract nature, such as semantic drifts affecting grammar (L. Anderson 1975 ; Traugott 1982). Boulle 1988,1996,
proposed a “ theory of the volcano ”. According to it, deictic markers flow down historically like a lava from
“ warm ” values − near the crater − to cold or cooler values, that is from situated forms, in close connection with the
speaker (“ énonciateur ”) and the moment of speech, to aoristic meanings.127 The hypothesis is documented in many
languages and is somehow parallel to the drift from marked forms to unmarked forms, resulting from the
generalisation of the former, in a cyclic movement, proposed by the “ naturalness ” theories : cf. for example, Ch.J.N.Bailey 1973. Obviously, the progressive is situated and the simple form is usually aoristic. No surprise then if
the progressive was first introduced in oral speech, where it still prevails as we are entitled to think.
Both diachronic trends are possibly at work in the development of the progressive in the 19th century : the tendency
to develop analytical, periphrastic forms 128 and the renewal of illocutionary force by the adoption of what is felt to
be more definite, more concrete, more close to the situation of speech and the speaker, who is often the subject of the
sentence as well.
This, however, raises another thorny question. When she spoke of “ involvement of the subject ”, in her paper of
1951, an important landmark, Anna Granville Hatcher was taking the word subject in the usual sense of “ subject of
the sentence ”. She was not alluding to the speaker, who is the subject of the utterance process ; nor to another
subject, the analyst.
Three levels have to be considered, in fact : the level of reference, the level of utterance, and the metalinguistic
level. At the level of reference, speaking of 19th century usage, we can largely accept Hatcher’s definition of
“ involvement of the subject ” : “ (1) the effect of the activity on the subject, (2a) his absorption in activity, or (2b)
the results or aims of this activity. ” ; except that activity is a disputable term, as we have seen, in many common
cases, and that we must also, especially in 19th century English, consider “ symmetric ” passives of the old type,
where the subject of the sentence is actually the “ object ” (the patient) of the predication : our garden is putting in
order (J. Austen). In many cases, the progressive also played the part of a “ middle voice ”. This is the first level of
analysis.
The second level is that of the speaker (or “ énonciateur ” in Culioli’s terms, to stress that it is a formal entity) : one
cannot say that it is not involved in any statement “ it ” makes, since this is what speaking, or writing, implies.
The third level is that of the analyst : the grammarian, for example.
The second and third “ subjects ” are necessarily people ; only the first can be non-human and even non-animate.
on the written documents, from which we can only draw inferences concerning the spoken language. Vast questions
then arise as to mutual influences in modern times between the two. Letter-writing seems, of course, to encourage
subjectivity more perhaps than any other situation. Linguistic change may well affect differently the different
"genres", but it would seem that it is in the same direction.
127
There is a spatial, geographical counterpart to this: Paul Kay 1977 suggested that there are languages, mostly
oral, which can do without forms disconnected from the actual situation of speech: the aorist is one of such forms.
The notion of "primitive" languages can be renewed by this observation, simply emphasizing the enlargement of
man's universe in terms of space and historical time.
128
The periphrastic perfect (passé composé), originally mostly a "present relevance" form in French gradually took
the place of the aoristic simple past (passé simple) which was still common even in ordinary speech in the nineteenth
century and more recently in some dialects. Was the modern world-view altered from this shift? This would be a
parallel suggestion to that concerning the English progressive.
99
It would seem that those three levels are not always as separated as we should wish them to be.129 For convenience’s
sake, let’s consider the third level subject, the subject of metalinguistic discourse. It is now well-accepted −
Bloomfield 1944 already spoke of “ secondary and tertiary responses to language ” − that any speaker is also a
linguist at times and more often than we believe. This involves a fairly frequent confusion between language and
metalanguage, once responsible, for example, for the famous allusions to the “ life of language ” (“ la langue fait
ceci ou cela” ) which Schuchardt denounced as well as Saussure : in words, but they did not easily dispense in
practice with that sort of transfer, forgetting the activity of language users.
So when someone says : “ You have been drinking ! ” it is not “ you ”, the subject of the sentence (S1), who is
emphasizing the effect of drink. The reply may be : “ Yes, I drank six Martinis ” ; it is the speaker(S2) who is
alluding to the condition of S1 instead of just referring to the act that originated it. Perhaps S1 will reply : “ You’re
telling me ! ”, which would be reacting to the speaker’s statement rather than to the facts themselves : in which case,
both parties would assume the part of S3, the metalinguistic subject.130 This is particularly true when human agents
are subjects of the sentence, but can easily be extended by some sort of spontaneous animism − rather than mere
grammatical analogy − to animals, and even what are called inanimates (tools, carriages, food, meteorological
entities, etc.). It must also be remembered that speech is always dialogic, and this is still true in the absence of the
interlocutor : letter-writing is an outstanding case of the absence-presence of the other party.
The confusion, or rather the unpredictable shifting between levels, is more frequent between the subject of the
sentence and the speaker, subject of the utterance process. First because the two are often the same (first person).
Second because there is a often a transfer, which we can simply describe by a word like “ interest ”, the opposite of
“ detachment ”. This may be how intimacy is correlated with what we call spontaneity.
In other terms, we are led to use once more what has long been considered by linguists as almost an obscene word :
expression. The emphasis on communication (even when it is not reduced to the cognitive component, still a
common fallacy) sometimes forgets that language (parole) is not limited to it. 131 In his often-quoted paper of 1958,
Roman Jakobson (in Sebeok 1960), after Buehler, gave a description of the different functions of speech (cf. also
Labov 1982). Besides phatic function, which certainly accounts for much of letter-writing, yesterday, and
telephoning today, we cannot deny the importance of expression in it. So that a term like spontaneity will stress the
expressive value, whereas intimacy refers to the fact that it is also communication, but often not purely cognitive.
When we are studying parole instead of langue, we must consider that speakers are human beings who have not
been trained to Cartesian methods and are inclined to syncretism and transfer. The tentative remarks above are
perhaps a way of considering the statement by Saussure himself that all that is in la langue has first been in la parole,
and one of the often-quoted remarks by Schuchardt that, whereas synchronic linguistics is the linguistics of la
129
On this point I am indebted to Jean-Blaise Grize and his approach to everyday natural logic with the concept of
"schematization": see for example Grize 1982,1990. It must also be noted that in the corpus studied, 41 % of the
occurrences have first person subjects.
130
This might be further formalized. Some generativists once postulated an original performative of "saying" at the
origin of derivations. In any case, trying to develop the hidden movements of the mind leading to an utterance is an
endless task. Much of the intricate network of notions and mental operations has been called "préconstruit" by
Culioli, something in which physical and also psychosociological factors obviously play a large part, not easily
formalized with the tools of conventional logic. And it seems that ordinary logic is far from Aristotelian: on this
again, see J.-B. Grize, passim.
131
This was typical of the structuralist school (Hockett, etc.) and and has been successfully challenged since then.
100
langue, diachronic linguistics is the linguistics of la parole, another way of summing up the suggestions of Empirical
foundations.
This is perhaps going too far and confusing the short term and the middle and long term. Our purpose was not to
cover the long-term drift where the virtualities of system have to be described in more abstract terms, but to throw
light on the actuation, or simply on the acceleration ; and the above suggestions are just an attempt at connecting the
two.
101
BIBLIOGRAPHY
of the collections of letters
AUSTEN :
Chapman, R.W. (1932). Jane Austen’s Letters to her sister Cassandra and others. Oxford : Clarendon Press. [One
vol. ed. : 1952].
BROWNING, Robert & BROWNING, Elizabeth Barrett :
Wise, T.J. (1933). Letters of Robert Browning. New Haven : Yale University Press. XX,389. [ 1973 reprint : New
York, London : Kennikat Press.]
Berridge, Elizabeth. (1974). The Barrets at Hope End. The Early Diary of Elizabeth Barrett-Browning. London :
John Murray : XIII, 276.
Kintner, Elvan. (1969). The Letters of Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett-Barrett, 1845-1846. Cambridge,
Mass. : The Belktrap Press of Harvard University Press. I : XVIV,568 ; II : VII, 1119.
Huxley, Leonard. (1929). Elizabeth Barrett-Browning : Letters to her Sister, 1846-1859. London : John Murray :
XXV,334.
Miller, Betty. (1954). Elizabeth Barrett to Miss Mitford. London : John Murray : XVII, 284.
Heydon, Peter.N. ; Kelley, Philip. (1974). Elizabeth Browning’s Letters to Mrs. David Ogilvy, 1849-1861. London :
John Murray : 174 p.
McCarthy, Barbara. P. (1955). Elizabeth Barrett to Mr. Boyd. London : John Murray : XXIX, 299.
CARLYLE :
Sanders, Charles R. & Fielding, Kenneth J. . (1970-). The Collected Letters of Thomas and Jane Welsh Carlyle.
Duke Edinburgh Edition. Durham, North Carolina : Duke University Press.
Vol. 1 : 1812-1821 : IX, 421 ; Vol.2 : 1822-1823 : XIII, 497 ; Vol. 3 : 1824-1825 : 446p ; Vol. 4 : 18261828 : XV, 493 ; Vol. 5 : 1829-Sept.1831 : XII,448 ; Vol. 6 : Oct. 1831-Sept. 1833 : 446p. ; Vol. 7 :Oct. 1833-Dec.
1834 : XV,442 ; Vol. 8 : Jan.1835-June 1836, 365 p. ; Vol. 9 : July 1836-1837, 434 p. ; Vol.10 : 1838-1840, 258 p.
Marrs, Edwin. W. (1968). The Letters of Thomas Carlyle to his Brother Alexander, with related family letters. The
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press : Cambridge, Mass. XII, 830.
COLERIDGE :
Griggs, Earl Leslie. (1956-71). Collected Letters of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Oxford : Clarendon Press. 6 vols.
Vol. 1 : 1785-1800, xxxix, 659 ; Vol. 2 : 1801-1806, viii, 661-1219 ; Vol.3 : 1807-1814, lii, 544 ; Vol. 4 : 18151819, xi, 545-1000 ; Vol. 5 : 1820-1825, lxi, 529 ; Vol. 6 : 1826-1834, x, 531-1089.
DICKENS :
House, M. ; Storey, G.(1965-) The Letters of Charles Dickens. The Pilgrim Edition. Oxford : Clarendon Press.I. :
1820-1839, XLV,744 ; II. 1840-41, 547 p. : ; III : 1842-1843, 692 p. ; IV : 1844-1846, 771 p. ; V : 1847-1849,
753.p.
Anonymous.(1980) The Letters of Charles Dickens, edited by his sister-in-law and his eldest daughter.London :
Chapman & Hall. [Second edition]. 2 vols.
EDGEWORTH :
Hare, A.J.C. (1894). The Life and Letters of Maria Edgeworth.[Reprinted 1971] : Freeport, N. Y. : Books for
Libraries Press ; 2 vols . I. 339 p. ; II. 341-704.
102
Colvin, Christian (1971). Maria Edgeworth : Letters from England (1813-1844). Oxford : Clarendon Press.
103
ELIOT :
Haight, G. S.(1954).
The G. Eliot Letters. New Haven : Yale University Press. 9 vols.Vol 1 : 1836-1851 :
XXVII, 378 ; Vol. 2 : 1852-1858 : 513p. ; Vol. 3 : 1859-1861 : 475p. ; Vol. 4 : 1862-1868 : 502p. ; Vol. 5 : 18691873 : 475p. ; Vol. 6 : 1874-1877 : 440p ; Vol. 7 : 1878-1880 : Vol. 7, 523 ; Vols. 8-9 : Supplements.
GASKELL :
Chapple, J. A. V. ; Pollard, Arthur. (1966). The Letters of Mrs. Gaskell. Manchester : Manchester University Press,
XXIX, 1010.
HUTCHINSON :
Coburn, K. (1954).The Letters of Sara Hutchinson from 1800 to 1835. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul ;
XXXVIII, 474.
KEATS :
Rollins, Hyder Edward. (1958). The Letters of John Keats. 2 vols : I. 1814-1818, XXII,442 ; II. 1819-1821, XIII,
440. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Gittings, R. (1970). Letters of John Keats. A New Selection. Oxford : Oxford University Press. [Reprinted with
corrections, 1975].
MACAULAY :
Pinney, Thomas. (1974-1981) The Letters of Thomas Babington Macaulay. The Claremont College, Claremont,
California : Cambridge University Press ; 6 vols. I : 1807-Feb. 1831, 320p. ; II : March 1831-1833, 377 p. ; III :
1834-1840, 387 p. ; IV : 1841-1848, 403 p. ; V :1849-Dec. 1855, XIV, 984 ; VI : 1856-1859, XII, 484.
RUSKIN :
Van Akin Burd, J. (1973).The Ruskin Family Letters. The Correspondence of John James Ruskin, his Wife and their
Son. 2 vols. I. lviii, 417 ; II. 421-792. Ithaca & London : Cornell University Press.
Shapiro, Harold E. (1972). Ruskin in Italy. Letters to his Parents, 1845. XXII, 263. Oxford : Clarendon Press. /
Bradley, J.L. (1955). Ruskin’s Letters from Venice, 1851-1852. New Haven : Yale University Press, XX, 330.
SCOTT :
Grierson, H. J. C., assisted by Davidson Cook, W.M. Parker and others (1932). The Letters of Sir Walter Scott.
London : Constable & Co. [Centenary Edition ; 12 vols.] : Letters from different periods have sometimes been
included in a given volume.
Vol. I (1790-1807) : XCV, 531 ; Vol. III (1811-1814) : XV, 542 ; Vol. VII (1821-1823) : XXII,511 ; Vol. XI
(1828-1831) : XVIII, 496 ; Vol. XII (1831-1832) : XII, 520.
SOUTHEY :
Curry, Kenneth. (1965). New Letters of Robert Southey. New York & London : Columbia University Press ; 2 vols.
I : 1792-1810: XIX, 551 ; II : 1811-1838 : XIX, 552.
104
THACKERAY :
Ray, Gordon N. .(1945). The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray. London : Oxford
University Press. 4 vols.I : 1817-1840 ; II : 1841-1851 ; III : 1852-1856 ; IV : 1857-1863.
WELSH : see Carlyle.
WORDSWORTH, Mary
Burton, M. A. (1958). The Letters of Mary Wordsworth, 1800-1855 Oxford : Clarendon Press : XXIX, 363.
WORDSWORTH, William & Dorothy :
Selincourt, Ernest. de (1967). The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
Vol.I : The Early Years 1787-1805 : XXXIII, 729. [Revised by Chester. L. Shaver].
Vol. II, 1. The Middle Years : 1806-1811 : XXVI, 546.[Revised by Mary Moorman].
Vol. II, 2 . The Middle Years : 1812-1820 : XX, 691. [Revised by Mary Moorman and Allan G. Hill].
Vol. III, 1. The Later Years : 1821-1828 : XXXII, 730. [Revised, arranged and edited by Allan G. Hill].
Vol. V, 2. The Later Years : 1829-1834 : XXII, 789. [Revised, arranged and edited by Allan G. Hill].
Selincourt, Ernest de (1939-1988). The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth. The Later Years, Vol. 2 :
1831-1840. Oxford, Clarendon Press : XIV, 545-1059.
The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth.VI. The Later Years. Part III : 1835-1839, XXV, 794.VII. The
Later Years. Part IV : 1840-1853, XVII, 951. [Revised, arranged and edited by Allan G. Hill from the first edition
by the late Ernest de Selincourt]. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
105
REFERENCES
La philosophie analytique, Cahiers de Royaumont 1962. Paris : Editions de Minuit
Aitchison, J. 1981. Language change : progress or decay ? London : Fontana.
Aitken, A.J. ; McArthur, Tom 1979. Languages of Scotland. Edinburgh : Chambers.
Adamczewski, Henri 1978. Be + -ing dans la grammaire de l’anglais contemporain.Paris : Champion (Thèse de
doctorat d’Etat 1976).
Akerlund, A. 1911 On the History of the Definite Tenses in English. Cambridge & Lund.
Anderson, J.M. 1982. Language form and linguistic variation. Papers dedicated to Angus McIntosh. Amsterdam :
John Benjamins.
Anderson, Lloyd 1975. Uniting three traditions : the classical study of grammatical-category space, and lexical
decomposition in generative semantics, in R.W. Fasold & R.W. Shuy, (eds.) Analyzing Variation in Language,
Washington. D.C. : Georgetown University Press, 241-68.
Archer-Jackson, John 1963. The Irish in Britain. London : Routledge and Kegan.
Aristotle : Metaphysics 6/1048b 18-35
___________
: Nicomachean ethics 1174 a 29 b 5
___________
1994. Traité du temps. Introduction, traduction et commentaires par Catherine Collobert. Paris : Kimé.
Arnaud, René 1973. La forme progressive en anglais du XIXe siècle. Lille : service de reproduction des thèses
(Doctorat d’Etat, Université Paris VII). [Out of print.]
________________
1979. Regard sur la variation syntaxique : la forme progressive dans la correspondance de George
Eliot (1838-1880). Cahiers Charles V, 1, 105-18.
________________
1980. Quelques observations quantitatives “ en temps réel ” sur un changement : l’accroissement
d’emploi de la forme progressive dans la 1ère moitié du XIXe siècle. Actes du Congrès de Poitiers de la Société des
Anglicistes de l’Enseignement supérieur. Etudes Anglaises N° 90. Paris : Didier Erudition, 67-75.
________________
1983. On the progress of the progressive in the private correspondence of famous British people (18001880), in : Sven Jacobson, (ed.) Papers from the Second Scandinavian Symposium on syntactic variation
(Stockholm, May 15-16, 1982), 83-94.
_______________
1983. Les règles, le jeu et les règles du jeu. Quelques réflexions méthodologiques sur l’étude sociohistorique de la variation. Modèles linguistiques, V,1, 17-62.
_______________
1998. The development of the progressive in 19th century English: A quantitative survey. Language
Variation and Change, 10, 123-152.
_______________
2000. A propos du schéma ETRE+PARTICIPE PRESENT dans quelques versions du Nouveau
Testament. Modèles et traductions diverses. Cycnos 17. 203-12 No spécial 2000. (Journées Charles V sur les
propositions relatives et l’aspect be+ing). Université de Nice.
Bailey, Ch.-James N. 1973. Variation and linguistic theory. Arlington, Virginia : Center for Applied linguistics.
Bailey, Charles-James N. ; Shuy, Roger W. (eds.). 1973.
Washington, D.C. : Georgetown University Press.
New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English.
Bailey, Guy ; Winkle, Tom ; Tillery, Jane ; & Sand, Lori. 1991. The apparent-time construct. Language Variation
and Change 3 : 241-264
Bain, Alexander 1863. Higher English Grammar. London: Longmans, Green and Co.
———————1870. Logic. London : Longmans, Green and Co.
Basch, Françoise 1974. Relative Creatures. Women in Society and the Novel. London : Longman (Penguin).
106
___________________
1979. Les femmes victoriennes. Paris : Payot
Bennett, Michael ; Partee, Barbara 1972. Toward the logic of tense and aspect in English. System Development
Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif.; Bloomington : Indiana University Linguistic Club.
Benveniste, Emile 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris : Gallimard.
Bergson, Henri 1896. Matière et mémoire. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France. (1941 edition).
Best, Geoffrey, 1971. Mid-Victorian Britain 1851-75. Bungay, Suffolk : Weidenfield and Nicolson. (Revised ed.:
Panther Books, 1973)
Biber, Douglas 1995. Dimensions of register variation : A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge : Cambridge
University Press.
Bloomfield, Leonard 1944. Secondary and tertiary responses to language. Language 20, 45-55.
Bolinger, Dwight 1971. The Nominal in the Progressive. Linguistic Inquiry II, 2, 246-250.
Boulle, Jacques 1988. La théorie du volcan; in : M.-L. Groussier (ed.). Pourquoi la linguistique diachronique ?
Paris Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot
Boulle, Jacques 1996 (forthcoming). Le renouvellement des systèmes aspectuels. Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris
VII-Denis Diderot.
Bourdieu, Pierre 1982. Ce que parler veut dire. Paris : Fayard.
Braconnier, Alain 1996. Le sexe des émotions. Paris : Odile Jacob.
Brinton, Laurel J. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 49.
Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Bull, William E. 1968. Time, tense and the verb. Berkeley : University of California Press.
Buyssens, Eric 1958. Les deux aspectifs de la conjugaison anglaise au XXe siècle. Etude de l’expression de
l’aspect. Bruxelles, Paris : Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles; Presses Universitaires de France.
Bybee, J. ; R. Perkins & W. Pagliuca 1994. The evolution of grammar : Tense,Aspect and Modality in the
Languages of the World. Chicago & London : The University of Chicago Press.
Cerquiglini, Bernard 1991. La naissance du français. Paris : PUF (Collection Que Sais-Je ?).
Chambers, J. K. 1995. Sociolinguistic theory. Linguistic variation and its social significance. Oxford, U.K ;
Cambridge, Mass. : Blackwell.
Charleston, Britta Marian 1941. Studies on the syntax of the English verb. Swiss Studies in English II, X, 209.
_______________________________
1955. A reconsideration of the problem of time, tense and aspect in English. English
Studies XXXVI, 1, 263-78.
_______________________________
1960. Studies on the emotional and affective means of expression in modern English.
Berne : Francke Verlag.
Chartier, Roger (ed.) 1991. La correspondance. Les usages de la lettre au XIXe siècle. Paris : Fayard.
Close, R.A. 1959. Concerning the Present Tense. English Language Teaching XIII, 57-66.
Cobb, Allan 1973. The present progressive periphrasis and the metaphysics of Aristotle. Phronesis, A Journal for
Ancient Philosophy. Assen : Van Gorcum 18, 80-90.
Collobert, Catherine 1994. Aristote, Traité du temps. Physique, Livre IV. Introduction, traduction et commentaire.
Paris : Kimé.
Comrie, Bernard 1976. Aspect. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Culioli, Antoine 1981. Pour une linguistique de l’énonciation. Opérations et représentations. Paris : Ophrys.
___________________
1995. Cognition and Representation in Linguistic Theory. Texts, selected, edited and introduced by
Michael Liddle, translated with the assistance of John T. Stonham. Amsterdam, Philadelphia : John Benjamins.
Curme, George O. 1931. A Grammar of the English Language. Vol. III. Syntax. Boston : D.C. Heath & Co.
107
Dahl, Östen 1981. On the definition of the telic-atelic (bounded-nonbounded) distinction. Syntax and semantics 14,
79-90.
DeCamp, David 1972. What do implicational scales imply ? in Ch.-J.N. Bailey ; Roger Shuy (eds.). New ways of
analyzing variation in English. Washington, D.C. : Georgetown University Press.
Denison, David 1993. English historical syntax: Verbal constructions. London and New York: Longman.
—————— 1998. Syntax ; in Suzanne Romaine (ed.). Cambridge History of the English Language IV.
Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Desclaire, Violette 1973. Langue et société. Etude méthodologique : le style des correspondances féminines sous
les deux derniers Stuarts (1688-1714). Thèse de doctorat d’Etat, Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot.
Diver, William 1963. The Chronological System of the English Verb. Word 19-2 ,141-181.
Dowty, David 1972. Studies in the logic of verb aspect and time reference in English. Studies in Linguistics 1,
Department of Linguistics, University of Texas at Austin.
_________________
1977. Towards a semantic analysis of verb aspect and the English imperfective progressive.
Linguistics and philosophy, 1, 45-77.
Eckert, Penelope 1989. The whole woman : Sex and gender differences in variation. Language Variation and
Change 1 ,245-268.
Ellegard, Alvar 1953. The auxiliary do. The establishment and regulation of its use in English. Stockholm :
Almqvist and Wiksell.
Encrevé, Pierre ; de Fornel, Michel ; et al. 1983. L’usage de la parole. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales
46. Paris : Editions de Minuit.
François, Jacques 1983. La résurgence des catégories aristotéliciennes energeia/kinesis dans les discussions actuelles
sur le mode d’action télique. Suivi d’une bibliographie commentée. DRLAV 28, 79-96.
Fuchs, Catherine (ed.) 1991. Les typologies de procès. Paris : Klincksieck.
Gauchat, Louis 1905. L’unité phonétique dans le patois d’une commune. in Aus Romanischen Sprachen und
Literaturen : Festschrift Heinrich Morf, 175-232.
Gérin, Winifred 1976. Elizabeth Gaskell. A biography. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
Givon, T. 1989. Mind, Code and Context. Essays in Pragmatics. Hillsdale, N.J.-London : Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Goldsmith, John ; Woisetschlaeger, Erich 1976.
University Linguistics Club.
The Logic of the Progressive Aspect. Bloomington : Indiana
_________________________________________________
1976. The logic of the English progressive. Linguistic Inquiry 13 , 79-89
Goux, Henri-Pierre 1971. A statistical study of the progressive form in today’s English pop-music. Mémoire de
maîtrise, Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot. (Unpublished).
Granville Hatcher, Anna 1951. The use of the progressive form in English. A new approach. Language 27,3, 25480.
Grize, Jean-Blaise 1982. De la logique à l’argumentation. Genève-Paris : Droz.
______________________
1990. Logique et langage. Paris : Ophrys
Groussier, Marie-Line (ed.) 1988. Pourquoi la linguistique diachronique ? (Table ronde 24 Oct. 1987). Paris :
Publications de l’association des médiévistes anglicistes de l’enseignement supérieur 13.
Groussier, M.L. ; Rivière, C. 1996. Les mots de la linguistique. Lexique de linguistique énonciative. Paris :
Ophrys.
Guillemin-Flescher, Jacqueline 1977. Analyse comparée des catégories grammaticales et des opérations de
référence en français et en anglais. Thèse de Doctorat d’Etat, Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot.
108
____________________________________
1981. Syntaxe comparée du français et de l’anglais. Problèmes de traduction. Paris :
Ophrys
Guy, Gregory 1990. The sociolinguistic types of linguistic change. Diachronica 7 , 47-67.
Haight, Gordon S. 1968. George Eliot. A biography. London, New York : Oxford University Press ; (Reprinted in
Penguin Books 1992).
Hancil, Sylvie 2000. Beon + ende en vieil-anglais. Cycnos 17. 91-104. No spécial 2000. (Journées Charles V sur
les propositions relatives et l’aspect be+ing). Université de Nice.
Hatcher, Anna Granville 1951. The use of the progressive form in English. A new approach. Language 27,3, 25480.
Heine, Bernd. 1994. Grammaticalization as an Explanatory Parameter, in W. Pagliuca (ed.) Perspectives on
Grammaticalization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia : Benjamins : 255-287.
Herdan, Gustav 1964. Quantitative linguistics. London : Butterworths.
___________________
1966. The advanced theory of language as choice and chance. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York :
Springer.
Hill, Archibald 1958. Introduction to linguistic structures. New York : Harcourt, Brace.
Holmes, Richard 1989. Coleridge. Early Visions. London :Hodder & Stoughton . ( Penguin Books 1990).
Humboldt, Wilhelm Von 2000. Sur le caractère national des langues et autres écrits sur le langage. Présentés,
traduits et commentés par Denis Thouard. Bilingue. Paris: Editions du Seuil.
Imbs, Paul 1960. L’emploi des temps verbaux en français moderne. Paris : Klincksieck.
Jacobson, Sven (ed.) 1983. Papers from the second Scandinavian symposium on syntactic variation. Stockholm :
Almqvist & Wiksell.
Jakobson, Roman 1958. Linguistics and poetics, in : Ths. Sebeok (ed.). Style in language. Cambridge, Mass. :
M.I.T. Press, 350-77.
Jespersen, Otto 1931. A modern English grammar on historical principles, Part IV. London : Allen and Unwin
(Reprinted 1961).
Joos, Martin 1964. The English verb. Madison : The University of Wisconsin Press.
Juillard, Michel 1983. L’expression poétique chez Cecil Day Lewis. Vocabulaire,syntaxe, métaphore. Etude
stylostatistique. Genève : Slatkine.
Kastovsky, Dieter. 1994. Studies in Early Modern English. Berlin ; New York : Mouton de Gruyter.
Kay, Paul 1977. Language evolution and speech style, in : B.G.Blount & M. Sanches (eds.). Sociocultural
dimensions of language change. New York : Academic Press, 255-68.
Kenny, Anthony 1963. Action, emotion and will. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul.
König, E. 1980. On the Context-Dependence of the Progressive in English, in : Roher, C. (ed.) Time, Tense and
Quantifiers : Proceedings of the Stuttgart Conference on the Logic of Tense and Quantification, 269291.(Linguistische Arbeiten 83.) Tübingen : Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Kipers, Pamela 1987. Gender and topic. Language in Society 16,4 , 543-557.
Kytö, Merja ; Rissanen, Matti ; Wright, Susan 1994. Corpora across the centuries. Proceedings of the First
International Colloquium on English Diachronic Corpora : St Catharin’s College, Cambridge, 25-27 March 1993.
Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA : Rodopi.
Klein, Flora 1980. A quantitative study of syntactic and pragmatic indications of change in the Spanish of bilinguals
in the U.S., in : Wm Labov (ed.). Locating language in time and space. New York, London : Academic Press.
Knott, G.H. (ed.) 1952. Trial of William Palmer. Edinburgh & London : William Hodge & Co. (Notable British
Trials Series).
109
Koschmieder 1935. Zu den Grundfragen der Aspecttheorie. Indogermanische Forschungen 53, 280-300.
Kroch, Anthony 1989. Function and grammar in the history of periphrastic “ do ”, in R. Fasold and R. Schiffrin
(eds.). Language Variation and Change. Orlando : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.133-72.
Labov, William 1980 (ed.) Locating language in time and space. New York, London : Academic Press.
__________________
1981. Resolving the neogrammarian controversy. Language 57 , 267-309 (1981).
1982. Building on empirical foundations, in W.P.Lehmann; Y. Malkiel, (eds.). Perspectives on
historical linguistics. Amsterdam : Benjamins.
__________________
_________________
1994. Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 1 : Internal factors. Oxford, U.K. ; Cambridge, U.S.A. :
Blackwell.
_________________
2001. Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 2 : Social factors. Oxford, U.K. ; Cambridge, U.S.A. :
Blackwell.
Lakoff, Robin 1973. Language and woman’s place. Language in Society 2,1, April 1973.
Lawton, R. 1959. The Irish Community in Liverpool in 1851. Irish Geography, IV, No.1.
Leech, Geoffrey N. 1971. Meaning and the English verb. London : Longman.
Leonard, Sterling A. 1929. The doctrine of correctness in English usage 1700-1800. New York : Russell and
Russell, (1962 reprint).
Leskien, A. 1876. Die declination im slavisch-litautschen und germanischen. Leipzig.
Ljung, Magnus 1980. Reflections on the English Progressive. Göteborg : Acta Universitatis Gothonburgensis
(Gothenburg Studies in English 46).
Marchello-Nizia, C. 1988. L’argumentation sur une langue de corpus, in M.L. Groussier,(ed.). : Pourquoi la
linguistique diachronique ? Paris : Publications de l’association des médiévistes anglicistes de l’enseignement
supérieur13, 78-97.
Mayhew, Henry 1862. London labour and the London poor. London : Frank Cass. (New edition. 1967).
Milroy, Lesley 1987. Language and social networks. London and New York : Blackwell.
Mossé, Fernand 1938. Histoire de la forme périphrastique être + participe présent en germanique :I. 1ère partie :
Ancien germanique ; II. 2e partie : Moyen Anglais et Anglais Moderne. Paris : Klincksieck (Collection linguistique
publiée par la Société de linguistique de Paris. XLIII).
Mourelatos, Alexander P. D. 1981. Events, processes, and states. Syntax and semantics 14, 191-212.
Muller, Charles 1964. Essai de statistique lexicale; L’illusion comique de P. Corneille. Paris : Klincksieck.
__________________
1968. Initiation à la statistique linguistique Paris : Larousse.
Murray, Lindley 1795. An English grammar comprehending the Principles and Rules of the Language illustrated by
Appropriate Exercises and a Key to the Exercises. York. (5th ed. 1824)
Mustanoja, Tauno 1960. A Middle English syntax. Part I. Parts of speech. Helsinki : Société néo-philologique.
Nakamura, Fujio.1998 A word on the history of the English progressive passive. Tenth International Conference on
English Historical Linguistics, Manchester, 26 August.
Nehls, Dietrich 1974. Syncron-diachrone Untersuchungen zur Expanded Form im Englischen. München : Max
Hueber.
Nevalainen, Terttu ; Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena (eds.). 1996. Sociolinguistics and language history Studies based
on the Corpus of Early English Correspondence. Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA. : Rodopi.
Nickel, Gerhard (1966). Die “ Expanded Form ” im Altenglischen. Neumunster.
Normand, C. ; Caussat, P. ; Chiss, J.-L. ; Médina, J. ; Puech, C. ; Radzinski, A. 1978. Avant Saussure. Choix de
textes (1875-1924). Bruxelles : Editions Complexe.
110
Nugent, Charles 1993. From View to Vision. British watercolours from Sandby to Turner in the Whitworth Art
Gallery. Manchester : The Whitworth Art Gallery.
Nurmi, Arja 1996. Periphrastic DO and BE+ING : Interconnected developments ? in Nevalainen & RaumolinBrunberg (eds.). 1996. Sociolinguistics and language history. Studies based on the Corpus of Early English
Correspondence. Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA. : Rodopi.
_______________
1999. A social History of Periphrastic DO. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki LVI.
Ota, Akira 1963. Tense and aspect of Present-day American English. Tokyo : Kenkyusha.
Page, Norman 1972. The language of Jane Austen. Oxford : Blackwell.
Pagliuca, William (ed.). 1994. Perspectives on Grammaticalization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia : Benjamins.
Palmer, F. R. 1974. The English verb. London : Longman.
Perelman, Ch. 1962. In : La Philosophie analytique, p.294.
Perlmutter, David 1978. Impersonal passives and the inaccusative hypothesis. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual
Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society : The University of California at Berkeley.
Phillipps, K.C. 1970. Jane Austen’s English. London : Andre Deutsch.
——————1978. The Language of Thackeray. London : Andre Deutsch.
——————1984. Language and Class in Victorian England. Oxford : Blackwell.
Raybould, Edith 1957. On Jane Austen’s use of expanded verbal forms. One more method of approach to the
problems presented by these forms. Festschhrift Brunner, Wiener Beitrage zur Englishchen Philologie, 175-90.
Raumolin-Brunberg 1996. Apparent time, in : Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg (eds.). Sociolinguistics and
Language History. Amsterdam-Atlanta : Rodopi, 93-109.
Röhrer, C. (ed.) 1980. Time, Tense and Quantifiers : Proceedings of the Stuttgart Conference on the Logic of Tense
and Quantification, 269-291. (Linguistische Arbeiten 83.). Tübingen : Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Romaine, Suzanne 1982.
University Press.
Socio-historical linguistics.
Its status and methodology.
Cambridge :
Cambridge
_________________
(ed.) 1998. Cambridge History of the English Language IV. Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press.
Rostand, François 1951. Grammaire et affectivité. Paris : Vrin.
Roughead, William 1950. Trial of Jessie M’Lachlan. Edinburgh & London : William Hodge & Co.
Ruwet, Nicolas 1988. Les verbes météorologiques et l’hypothèse inaccusative, in Hommage à la mémoire de Jean
Stéfanini. Aix en Provence : Publication de l’Université de Provence
Rydén, Mats ; Brorström, Sverker 1987. The Be/Have variation with intransitives in English. Stockholm : Almqvist
& Wiksell.
Rydén, Mats 1979. An introduction to the historical study of English syntax. Stockholm : Almqvist & Wiksell
International.
Sag, Ivan A. 1972. On the state of progress on progressives and statives, in Ch.-J. N. Bailey ; Roger Shuy (eds.).
New ways of analyszing variation in English. Washington, D.C. : Georgetown University Press.
Samuels, M.L. 1972. Linguistic evolution with special reference to English. Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press.
Sankoff, David (ed.) 1978 Linguistic variation. Models and methods. New York : Academic Press.
Sankoff ; D. ; Labov, W. 1979. On the uses of variable rules. Language in Society 8, 2, 189-222.
Sankoff, Gillian 1973. Above and beyond phonology in variable rules, in : Bailey, C-J.N. & Shuy R. (eds). New
ways of analyzing variation in English. Washington, D.C. : Georgetown University Press.
Scheffer, Johannes 1975. The progressive in English. Amsterdam : North Holland ; Oxford : American Elsevier
(North Holland Linguistic Series).
Searle, John 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Sebeok, Thomas 1960. Style in language. Cambridge, Mass. : M.I.T. Press.
111
Sjoestedt, M.L. 1926. L’aspect verbal et les formations à affixe nasal en celtique. Paris : Champion (Collection
Linguistique de la Société de Linguistique de Paris).
Smith, Arvid 1917. Ueber eine bisher unbeachtete funktion des progressiven form, Beiblatt zur Anglia 28. 244-51
Smith, Carlota S. 1983. A theory of aspectual choice. Language 59,3, 479-501.
Smith, Sheila M. 1974. John Overs to Charles Dickens : a working-man’s letter and its implications. Victorian
studies, dec. 1974, 195-217.
Smitterberg, Erik 1998. “ The sun is shining, the air is delicious ! I like the climate of Manchester ! ! ! the
progressive form and genre variation during the 19th Century. 10th International Conference on English Historical
Linguistics, Manchester, 21-26 August 1998.
_____________________
2000. Pragmatic Functions of the Progressive Form in the 19th Century. 11th Conference on
English Historical Linguistics, Santiago de Compostela, 7-11 Sept. 2000.
______________________
(2002). The Progressive in 19th Century English.
Dissertation, Uppsala University.
A Process of Integration.
Doctoral
Stanzel, Franz 1957. Die Erzänsituation und die Umschriebenen Zeitformen. Festschift Brunner, Wiener Beitrage
zur Englischen Philologie, 220-31.
Strang, B.M. 1982. Some aspects of the history of the be+ing construction, in J. Anderson, (ed.). Language form and
linguistic variation. 427-74.
Swadesh, Morris 1952. Lexicostatistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts, in Proceedings of the American
Philosophical Society, 96, 462-463.
Tagliamonte, Sali 1998. Was/were variation across the generations: View from the city of York. Language
Variation and Change 10, 153-191.
Taine, Hippolyte 1863. Histoire de la littérature anglaise. Paris.
Tarde, Gabriel de 1895. Les lois de l’imitation. Paris, Genève : Slatkine Reprints 1979.
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. 1987.
approach. Dordrecht : Foris. :
The auxiliary Do in Eighteenth-Century English.
A sociohistorical
Thoiron, Philippe 1979. Index et concordance pour “ Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland ”. Problèmes, méthodes,
analyse statistique de quelques données. Thèse de doctorat d’Etat, Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot.
Thompson, E.P. 1963. The making of the English working class. Harmondsworth, England (Penguin Books).
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings : Some semantic aspects of
grammaticalization, in W.P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (eds.). Perspectives on historical linguistics. Amsterdam :
Benjamins : 245-271.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Heine, Bernard (eds.) (1991). Approaches to Grammaticalization. Amsterdam
Benjamins.
Van Hamel, A.G. 1912. On Anglo-Irish Syntax. Englische Studien Bd. 45
Vendler, Zeno 1957. Times and tenses, Philosophical Review.
Vendler, Zeno 1967. Verbs and times, in Z.Vendler, Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca : Cornell University Press.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee 1956. Language, thought and reality. (Selected writings). Cambridge, Mas.: The MIT Press.
Visser, G.J. 1955. Celtic influences in English. Neophilologus XXXIX, 276-89.
Vlach, Frank 1981. The semantics of the progressive. Syntax and semantics 14, 271-292.
Wang, William S. (ed.) 1977. The lexicon in phonological change. The Hague : Mouton.
Warner, Anthony 1993. English auxiliaries. Structure and history. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
_____________________
1995. Predicting the progressive passive : parametric change within a lexicalist framework.
Language 71, 3 : 533-557.
112
Wartburg, Walther v. 1963. Problèmes et méthodes de la linguistique. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France. (2nd
ed.)
Whorf, Benjamin Lee 1956. Language, thought and reality. (Selected writings). Cambridge, Massachusetts : MIT
Press.
Williams, Raymond 1976. Keywords. A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Glasgow : Fontana.
Woisetschlaeger, Erich F. 1977.
University Linguistics Club.
A semantic theory of the English auxiliary system.
Bloomington : Indiana
Wright, Susan 1994 a. The mystery of the modal progressive, in Dieter Kastovsky (ed.). Studies in Early Modern
English. Berlin ; New York : Mouton de Gruyter. 467-85.
__________________
1994 b The place of genre in the corpus, in : Merja Kytö, Matti Rissanen & Susan Wright (eds.).
Corpora across the centuries. Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA : Rodopi : 101-107.
Yule, G.U. 1944. The statistical study of literary vocabulary. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
113
ANNEX
The progressive across three centuries
Density of progressive forms for 100 000 words in a selection of fiction works
A number of studies dedicated to the progressive and its history contain at least allusions to its increasing frequency.
The table below covers only the early modern and modern periods — when semantic change was not too
considerable —, and the corpus of fiction, the only one where figures have been computed for a long period in a
sufficient number of works to give a useful picture: Figure 37 below..
However, it can only be indicative for many reasons:
1. The item studied is not clearly and consistently defined. The points to consider for that identification have been
listed in II. 4. Yet, apart from the inclusion or exclusion of the going to form, the distortions should not be
considerable.
2. More serious are those introduced by the statistical methods. Beginning with Mossé 1938, few scholars describe
them, even summarily. Strang 1982: 432 is an exception: she said she selected what she called “ chunks ” of 30 000
words, including the beginning and end of the novels she surveyed –why should beginning and end be especially
significant ? She may be supposed to have selected the chunks either randomly or in a systematic manner. It can be
seen that her counts differed notably from my own in the case of Jane Austen’s Emma or Maria Edgeworth’s Castle
Rackrent.
As exposed in II.5, many aspects of sampling are liable to make comparison difficult, as will be seen by comparing
the results for some given books in the table below:
1. Since the frequency (density here) is calculated on 100 000 words, the way words are counted is important: see
on this point II.5.
2. Counting progressive occurrences is easier, once you have pencilled them in the book: a hand counter is useful in
this respect. Errors are inevitable, as in any statistical survey: the point is to minimize them.
The discrepancies have not been disguised, on purpose. In preparing averages for the graph, by periods of
approximately 20 years, not evenly filled, a selection was made: historical novels (Westward Ho ! Henry Esmond,
Waverley Novels, etc.) and fiction works likely to contain too much dialect (Castle Rackrent, Handy Andy) have been
left out to avoid bias: they are in italics. Margaret Drabble’s Middle Ground too, since it seems to betray deliberate
avoidance of the progressive. When several counts exist, I have chosen that which seems to me the most accurate:
usually my own, for the reasons given above. There is still some ground for further refinement.
Sources:
Arnaud, René (1973). La forme progressive en anglais du XIXe siècle. Doctorat d'Etat, Université Paris VII
1972. Lille: Service de reproduction des thèses.
Mossé, Fernand (1938). Histoire de la forme périphrastique être + participe présent en germanique. 2e
partie: Moyen anglais et anglais moderne. Paris: Klincksieck.
Nickel, Gerhard (1966). Die “ Expanded Form ” im Altenglischen. Neumunster.
Scheffer, Johannes (1975). The Progressive in English. Amsterdam: North Holland; Oxford: American
Elsevier (North Holland Linguistic Series).
Strang, Barbara (1982). Some aspects of the history of the BE+ING construction, in John Anderson (ed.).
Language Form and Linguistic Variation. Papers Dedicated to Angus McIntosh. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
114
Date
Density
Author
Title
Source
1720-40
1719
1726
61 Defoe
80 Swift
54 "
Robinson Crusoe
Gulliver
"
Mossé
Strang
Mossé
1740-60
1740
1742
1748
1749
1751
186
80
92
50
80
30
Richardson
Fielding
"
Smollett
Fielding
Smollett
Pamela
Joseph Andrews
"
Roderick Random
Tom Jones
Peregrine Pickle
Strang
Strang
Mossé
Strang
Strang
Strang
1759
1766
1768
1778
119
169
190
128
Johnson
Goldsmith
Sterne
Burney
Rasselas
Vicar of Wakefield
Sentimental Journey
Evelina (Ist part)
Mossé
Mossé
Mossé
Mossé
500
360
190
123
111
140
235
213
390
353
404
283
56
133
156
63
110
250
423
313
93
223
100
Edgeworth
Castle Rackrent
Edgeworth
Austen
"
Belinda
Sense & Sensibility
"
Austen
"
Austen
"
Austen
"
Scott
Scott
Scott
Peacock
Peacock
Austen
Austen
Hogg
Scott
Hogg
Scott
Pride & Prejudice
"
Mansfield Park
"
Emma
"
Waverley
Guy Mannering
Old Mortality
Headlong Hall
Melincourt
Northanger Abbey
Persuasion
The Brownie of Bodsbeck
A Legend of Montrose
Justified Sinner
Count Robert of Paris
Strang
Arnaud
Strang
Arnaud
Mossé
Strang
Arnaud
Strang
Arnaud
Strang
Arnaud
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
Strang
266
269
277
213
241
245
280
Dickens
Lover
Dickens
Disraeli
Marryat
C. Bronte
"
Curiosity Shop
Handy Andy
The Chimes
Sybil
Children of New Forest
Jane Eyre
"
Arnaud
Arnaud
Mossé
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Strang
1800-1820
1800
1801
1811
1813
1814
1816
1814
1814
1816
1816
1818
1818
1818
1818
1819
1824
1832
1840-1860
1841
1842
1844
1845
1847
1847
115
1847
1848
1850
1851
1851
1852
1855
1855
1856
1856
1857
1859
1859
270
211
287
263
266
186
173
205
352
223
195
190
385
543
307
277
Thackeray
E. Bronte
Thackeray
Borrow
Gaskell
Thackeray
Kingsley
Trollope
Hughes
Mulock
Trollope
Dickens
Eliot
"
Meredith
1860-1880
1860
1861
1865
1868
1872
1897
309
323
251
230
285
379
Eliot
Eliot
Dickens
Collins
Hardy
Wells
1900-1920
1911
1914
1920-1940
1920
1928
1930
1859
"
Vanity Fair
Wuthering Heights
Pendennis
Lavengro
Cranford
Henry Esmond
Westward Ho !
The Warden
Tom Brown's Schooldays
John Halifax
Barchester Towers
Tale of Two Cities
Adam Bede
"
Richard Feverel
"
Strang
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Arnaud
Strang
Arnaud
Mossé
The Mill on the Floss
Silas Marner
Our Mutual Friend
The Moonstone
Under the Greenwood Tree
The Invisible Man
Arnaud
Strang
Arnaud
Arnaud
Mossé
Mossé
520 Lawrence
414 Joyce
The White Peacock
Dubliners
Strang
Mossé
512 Galsworthy
676 Waugh
713 Waugh
In Chancery
Decline & Fall
Vile Bodies
Mossé
Strang
Strang
730
513
781
630
703
557
648
854
280
Room at the Top
Unconditional Surrender
The Pumpkin Eater
The Girls of Slender Means
The Old Boys
The Red and the Green
The Man w. the Golden Gun
Life at the Top
The Middle Ground
Nickel
Strang
Scheffer
Scheffer
Scheffer
Scheffer
Scheffer
Scheffer
Arnaud
19601957
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1966
1980
Braine
Waugh
Mortimer
Spark
Trevor
Murdoch
Fleming
Braine
Drabble
116
Progressives in novels since 1700
By 20-year spans
700
600
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
500
400
300
200
100
0
1740
1760
1780
1800
1820
1840
1860
1880
1900
1920
1940
1960
1980
Dates (ends of spans)
Densities
BINARY GLIMPSES
In studies of the progressive form, the most common assumption is that, basically, we must account for the choice
between progressive and simple forms. As stated in I.2., this is only partly true. Nevertheless, when feasible, the
binomial study can be helpful and revealing.
However, the proportion of progressives to simple forms is very small : of the order of 2 per cent at the beginning
of the 19th century, all types of discourse (genres) considered, to possibly some 8 or 10 per cent in present-day
English. This means that parallel survey of the two forms in a given corpus implies disproportionate effort : to
collect the same number found in one page for the non-progressive, 50 pages or about are necessary for progressive
occurrences.
There are several ways of remedying to that. One is to concentrate on tenses of major significance : the past and the
perfect would be the most rewarding, undoubtedly. Conversely, we can eliminate some verb-forms such as the
infinitive, the participle, or even the passive, etc., where the progressive is rare, but at the expense of missing
interesting phenomena. Finally, BE, a very common verb, exceptionally found with the progressive, can be
excluded with little bias : but this must be clearly stated.
In Arnaud 1973, where the statistical survey was not in prominence, it had been found better to cover the whole
verb-system. To minimize the impact of the unbalanced distribution of the two forms, the following method had
been adopted : separate random samples of 1000 tokens were taken of the progressive and of the simple form in
each of the various strata and frequencies (densities) were then compared in the following way :
P/S = Q
P : frequency of the item in the progressive sample ; S : frequency of the item in the simple form sample.
The Q coefficient thus mirrors the comparative frequencies, but does not give their actual values. These can be
estimated in a rough way with reference to the overall frequencies of the two forms, but that Q coefficient is as good
a measure so long as comparison is aimed at.
117
The corpora
On the basis of preliminary surveys, 5 “ strata ”132 were selected as likely to provide a substantial harvest of
progressives : 1. Punch, the well-known satirical magazine (P) 133 ; 2. a random selection of private correspondence,
of the type used in the present work; 3. a choice of the reports of criminal trials of the time (T) ; 4. a random
selection of contemporary novels (N) ; 5. finally, within the latter, a random selection of passages of dialogue (D).
Table A
Distribution of Q in the verb forms
P
C
T
N
D
Present
2.27
1.69
1.34
1.72
1.94
Past
1.73
1.06
1.60
1.36
1.90
Perfect
2.35
2.74
1.06
2.51
2.72
Pluperf
1.18
2.00
2.24
0.79
1.28
Infinitive
0.14
0.07
0.06
0.15
0.10
Modal
0.15
0.01
0.19
0.16
0.19
Mod pfct
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.07
0.25
Pass
0.16
0.12
0.08
0.15
0.10
Total
8.78
7.81
5.58
6.89
8.51
Apart from Punch, selected because its style seems close to ordinary spoken English, especially in the numerous
cartoons, but which could also be treated as a very specific type of discourse, it can be seen that the strata where the
frequency of the progressive is greatest are the dialogue in novels and private correspondence. The comparative
frequency with the perfect tenses is also noteworthy.
Table B
Distribution of Q in the verb classes
Classes
P
C
State
0.12
0.16
Locative
3.10
1.53
Movt
2.65
2.14
Ubdd proc.
1.38
1.47
Bdd proc.
0.96
1.07
T
0.12
6.10
2.00
1.26
0.74
N
0.07
1.47
2.19
1.33
0.70
D
0.09
1.17
2.86
1.45
0.81
Total
0.12
2.67
2.37
1.38
0.76
Nb vbs
25
8
16
32
27
% prog
3.6
10
31
31
23
% simple
31
5
13
22
27
Nb vbs refers to the number of lexical items (verb bases). It is clear that, although BE was omitted, the percentage of
state verbs is great at the non-progressive form, in comparison with their low frequency in progressive utterances..
Conversely, locative verbs have a high rank as well as movement verbs.
Situated utterances
Another feasible survey consists in measuring the choice of progressive v. simple form in situations where it is not
constrained by internal factors (the now or then context). Two such situations were surveyed in the letters of George
Eliot and Mrs. Gaskell.
Contrary to what one might think, it is not so often that people say what they do at the very time when they are doing
it, apart from the well-known case of the conjurer or the practical scientist in front of an audience : they don’t need
132
Actually this is not the appropriate term in the statistical sense, in the absence of solid distributional laws. It is
just hinting at what has been considerably developed since, the multi-genre approach: cf. Smitterberg 1998, 2000
and forthcoming.
133
Only the collections for 1841 and 1870.
118
to. However, when writing letters, it is fairly common that people do so, witness the occurrences of write (more
than 1000 in our corpus).
Linguists will not easily be convinced that there are two ways of saying the same thing : “ one word one meaning ”
is almost an article of faith among us. My own belief is that there are situations, fairly common, when some
uncertainty or hesitancy happens. In such situations where minimum attention is paid to words, simply the
difference does not matter, whereas we, as linguists, are commonly paying a lot of attention to language.
A philosophical reference to this view can be found in Henri Bergson’s Matière et mémoire (1896, 1941 : 174-81).
Bergson insists that our everyday experience is at the level of action, i. e. somewhere between the extremes of
generalisation and individuation.
We can reasonably assume that when G. Eliot or Mrs Gaskell, writing to a near relative or friend, use the expression
“ I write ” or “ I am writing ”, we have no way of proving that they mean different things... nor can we prove the
opposite. This, in my opinion, is one of the clearest cases of variable rule. The results are given below, after Arnaud
1980.
Table B
I write/ I am writing in the letters of G. Eliot and Mrs. Gaskell, by five-year periods
George Eliot :
I write
9
3
1
5
4
7
8
5
Total : 42
____________________________________________________________________________________
I am writing
6
5
3
4
9
7
5
12
Total : 51
Mrs Gaskell
I write
0
2
14
9
0
Total : 25
____________________________________________________________________________________
I am writing
1
3
10
12
3
Total : 28
This tends to show that, in similar situations, the letter-writers hesitated between the two forms they considered
equivalent for practical purposes. What used to be called free-variation has been given renewed status by Labov, in
the micro-diachronic perspective we are adopting here. This seems more reasonable than trying to suppose
conscious or unconscious semantic subtleties at the back of the writers’minds in this type of situations. Notice that,
especially in the case of George Eliot, there is a tendency to favour the progressive phrase with the passing of time.
Table C
Go, come and other verbs with future reference (extended present) in Mrs Gaskell’s letters
by five-year periods
GO
1832-45
1846-50
1851-55
1856-60
1861-65
Totals
S
4
5
41
15
11
75
P
4
9
34
29
19
95
COME
S
P
1
4
0
6
21
32
9
10
8
6
39
58
Other verbs
S
P
3
1
7
1
22
4
13
8
8
1
53
15
Total
S
P
8
9
12
16
84
70
37
47
27
26
168 168
Cumulated
17
28
154
84
53
336
Percentage
S
P
47
53
43
57
54.5 45.5
44 56
51 49
50
50
In this case, with more significant figures, the same conclusion seems justified, since contexts did not give any
indication of difference of perspective, between, say, mere expectation and more personal committment.
119
120
LIST OF THE LETTER-WRITERS
Chronological order. Dates between slashes : first and last letters surveyed. Women-writers are in italics.
Nb PF Density
EDG : Maria Edgeworth (1767-1849)/1791-1840/
MAW : Mary Wordsworth (1770-1855)/1800-1854/
606
344
185
266
WMW : William Wordsworth (1770-1850)/1790-1850/
1234
144
DOW : Dorothy Wordsworth (1771-1832)/1787-1834/
902
177
HUT : Sara Hutchinson (1771-1835)/1800-1835/
316
157
SCO : Walter Scott (1771-1832)/1790-1832/
818
157
COL : Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834)/1791-1834/
1192
107
SOU : Robert Southey (1774-1843)/1792-1838/
656
176
AUS : Jane Austen (1775-1817)/1796-1817/
292
217
RUM : Margaret Ruskin (1781-1843)/1814-1842/
136
158
RUJ : John James Ruskin (1785-1842)/1808-1842/
101
179
CAR : Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)/1813-1876/
3722
259
KEA : John Keats (1795-1821)/1817-1820/
425
322
MAC : Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-59)/1807-1859/
1135
225
WEL : Jane Welsh-Carlyle (1802-1866)/1819-1842/
815
303
EBB : Elizabeth Barrett-Browning (1806-61)/1827-1861/
1128
205
GAS : Elizabeth Cleghorn Gaskell (1810-1865)/1832-1865/
1172
358
THA : William Makepeace Thackeray (1811-1863)/1820-1863/
1679
345
DIC : Charles Dickens (1812-1870)/1832-1870/
1813
271
BRO : Robert Browning(1812-1889)/1838-1889/
184
132
ELI : George Eliot (1819-1880) (Mary Ann Evans)/1836-1880/
2327
320
RUS : John Ruskin (1819-1900)/1827-1851/
761
326
Total PF
21759
Total density
222
121
SPECIMENS OF LETTERS
(extracts)
Due to the wide dispersion of progressives ,they are very few in the extracts below which have been selected only to
give an idea of tone and subject matter.
Grasmere, 16 April, 1802
My dear Coleridge
I parted with Mary on Monday afternoon about six oclock, a little on this side of Rushy-ford. Poor Creature ! she
would have an ugly storm of sleet and snow to encounter and I am anxious to hear how she reached home. Soon
after I missed my road in the midst of the storn, some people at a house where I called directed me how to regain the
road through the fields, and alas ! as you may guess I fared worse and worse. With the loss of half an hour’s time,
and with no little anxiety I regained the road. Unfortunately, not far from St Helen’s Auckland the Horse came down
with me on his knees, but not so to fall overhead himself or to throw me. Poor beast it was no fault of his ! a Chaisedriver of whom I inquired the next day told me it was a wonder he could travel at all, he wanted shoeing so sadly,
and his hoofs cleaning and paring... Yesterday after dinner we set off on foot meaning to sleep at Paterdale...at
Ambleside we called on the Luffs to see how Luff was but learning that the Boddingtons were upstairs we did not
see either Luff or his Wife. He has been dangerously ill but is now recovering fast. We reached home at dusk : so
ends my story.
Wm Wordsworth
Plymouth Grove, Monday evng [15 Nov. 1852].
My dearest Polly, [Marianne, her favourite daughter].
You did not read my last letter carefully I conclude, or else your letter was a long time on the way, I don’t know
which, for it had to be forwarded to me from Fox-How, and reached here yesterday. About the night gowns, they are
at Knutsford... if I had know [sic] here at Midsummer how very much you wanted them, I would have had them put
in hand sooner - as it is, and what with carriage etc they would come to as much as ready-made ; so if you are really
dead-pressed, and can’t wait till Xmas get three two ready made (calico) from Silvers’Corn-Hill. O yes ! We’ll
send a p-order for your cloak...There I think that’s all about dress,- except/.../ Moreover Hearn wants you to be
spying out and seeing if you cannot see 2 little rough bear coats or paletots for F E and Julia. Be gracious, civil and
handsome to servants and write me a particular account, not so much of the Duke’s funeral, as of Mr Mrs Chapman
and their ménage and children. Every body here is going into mourning...Mrs Rich and Snow Wedgewood come
here tomorrow
Your own affec
Mammy. (Elizabeth Gaskell).
To Hannah Macaulay [M’s sister].
London, November 30 1833
My love,
I enclose you a letter from the Temple − I have not time to write much to day, nor have I much to tell you if I had
time. Things stand as they stood, except that the report of my appointment [to a high magistracy in India, where
Hannah will accompany him] is every day spreading more widely, and that I am beset by advertising dealers begging
leave to make up a hundred cotton shirts for me, and fifty muslin gowns for you, and by clerks out of place begging
to be my secretaries.
I am not in very high spirits to day, as I have just received a letter from poor Ellis, who is wandering among the
corrupt Corporations of Kent, and to whom I had not communicated my intentions till yesterday. He writes so
affectionately and so plaintively that he quite cuts me to the heart [...] He is to return to London on the 12th or 13th of
next month. On the 11th - I forget whether I told you or not,- there is to be a dinner given to Lushington by the
electors of the Tower Hamlets [...]
Ever yours dearest,
T B Macaulay
122
Degrees of intimacy
Some names appear in two columns, for various reasons, e.g. the passage from distant early acquaintance to
intimacy, and the nature of topics (Macaulay’s letters to Napier are often about classics).
1
AUS
all letters
BRO
BRO
BRO
BRO
Blagden, Isa : “ dearest Isa ”
Elizabeth Barrett (Mrs. Browning)
Pen (son) & F.
Sarianna
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
CAR
Carlyle (mother and father)
Carlyle, Alexander (brother) : “ Alick ”
Carlyle, Jean (sister)
Carlyle, John (brother) : “ Jack ”
Welsh, Jane (Mrs. Carlyle)
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
Coleridge, George (brother)
Cottle, Joseph
Montagu, Basil
Poole, Ths.
Southey, Robert
Wade, Josiah
Wordsworth, Wm
DIC
DIC
DIC
DIC
Dickens, Ch. C. (son)
Dickens, Mary (daughter)
Hogarth, Kate (wife)
Hogarth, Georgina
DOW
DOW
DOW
DOW
DOW
DOW
DOW
Clarkson, Catherine
Hutchinson, Sara
Marshall, Jane
Mary Hutchinson (Mrs.W.)
William
W’s brothers
W’s children
EBB
neutralized
EDG
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
2
3
Murray
De Quincey, Ths.
Badams
Montague, Anna
Graham
Hope, David
Hunt, Leigh
Inglis, Henry
Johnston, James
Mill, Stuart
Mrs.Welsh
Wilson, John
Napier
Bull, John
Hunt, Leigh
Tait, C.
Wilson, Jane
Emerson, R.W.
Taylor, John
Boyd
Hessey
Tait, Wm.
Fraser
Robinson, H.C.
Julius
Goethe
Eckermann
Aitken
Gleig
Fraser, J.
D’Eichthal
all other letters
few
Southey, R.
Pearson, Wm.
Robinson, H.C.
all letters
Mrs. Bodichon : “ Barbara ”
Bray (Mrs. née Hennell) : “ Cara ”
Hennell, Sara Sophia “ Sara ”
Houghton, Mrs. Henry
Lewes, Charles Lee
Lewes, Mrs. Charles Lee
Parkes, Bessie Raynier
Stuart, Elma
Blackwood, John
Blackwood, William
Chapman, John
123
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
ELI
GAS
Combe, George
Congreve (Mrs. )
D’Albert Durade, François
Pattison (Mrs. Mark)
Spencer, Herbert
Daughters (Marianne: Polly)
nil
HUT
all letters
KEA
all letters
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
Empson
Macaulay, Frances
Macaulay, Hannah
Macaulay, Margaret
Macaulay, Mrs. (mother)
Macaulay, Selina
Macaulay, Zachary (father)
MAW
RUJ
all letters
all letters
RUM
RUS
all letters
all letters
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SCO
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
Lewis, Maria
All others (few)
Ellis
Napier
Baillie, Joanna
Carpenter, Charles
Erskine, Charles
Erskine, William
Lockhart, J.G.(Sophia’s husband)
Morrit
Richardson, John
Scott, Charles (son)
Scott, Lady (wife)
Scott, Sophia (daughter)
Scott, Thomas (brother) & his wife
Scott, Walter (son) & his wife
Sharpe, Charles
Clerk
Clephane, Miss & Mrs.
Constable
Croker
Rutherford, Miss
Buccleuch
Cadell
Baillie, Joanna
Kerr
Abercorn, Lady
Ballantyne, John
Ballantyne, James
Ellis, George
Erskine, Charles, William
Heber
Hughes, Mrs.
Laidlaw
Mackensie, Colin
Montagu, Lord
Morritt
Richardson
Rose
Scott, Mrs (mother)
Sharpe, Ch.K.
Skene
Smith, Miss
Southey
Stuart, Lady, Terry
Melville, Lord
Wordsworth.
Smith, Miss.
Bedford, G.Ch.
Bedford, H.W.
Danvers, Ch.
Fricker, E.
Southey, Bertha
Southey, Isabel
Southey, Mrs. Robert (wife)
Southey, Ths.
Williams Wynn, C.W.
Cottle, Joseph
May, John
Southey, H.H.
Rickman, John
Seward, Anna
Duppa, Richard
King, John
Coleridge, S.T.
Poole, Ths.
Betha, Matilda
Morgan, J-J.
Biddlecombe
Standert, H.C.
Senhouse, H.
Landor, W.S.
Robinson, H.C.
Britton, John
Grahame, J.
Murray, John
Crocker, John
Lockhart, J.G.
Ainsworth, W.
Hodson, Mrs.
Tonna, Mrs. C..
Cunningham.
Edgeworth, M.
Surtees, Robert
Hamilton, Lady
Haydon
Byron, Lord
Hartstonge
Polwhele
Laing
124
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
Hone, William
Laing, David
Kenyon, Lord
Moxon, E.
Farr Rosqe
Pickering, Wm.
Reade, John E.
THA
THA
THA
THA
THA
THA
Brookfield, Mrs.
Carmichael-Smith (his mother)
Daughters
Fitzgerald
Perry, Kate
Shawe, Isabella (wife)
WEL
WEL
WEL
WEL
Carlyle, Mrs (Thomas’s mother)
Carlyle, Thomas
Carlyle,Jean
Stoddart, Eliza
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
WMW
Clarkson, Catherine
Fenwick, Isabella
Hutchinson, Sara (Mary’s sister)
Mary Hutchinson (Mrs Wordsworth)
Wordsworth Dorothy (sister)
W’s brothers
W’s children
Stanley, Lady
Procter, Mrs.
Baxters
Perry, Kate
Welsh, Helen
Welsh, Mrs. George
Montagu,Anna
Hunter, Susan
Sharp, Richard
Haydon
Lowther, Lord
Lonsdale, Lord
Scott, Walter
Jewsbury
Stuart, Daniel
Moxon
Gordon, J.H.
Scott, John
Landor, W.S.
Watts, Alaric
Taylor, John
Cunningham.
Lockhart, J.G.
125
THE CODING FRAME
VERB VERB (lexical item)
Cl SEMANTIC CLASS (predication type) :
0 State :
01 Relational/statal (be/have type) : belong ; owe...
02 Declarative : agree, beg, suggest, refuse, name...
03 Cognitive : find ; seem ; hear ; believe...
04 Affective : love, like, hate, admire...
05 Prospective : aim, wish, mean, pine(for), expect, fear, wait ( for)...
06 Retrospective : recall, forget, repent...
10 Locative : sit, reside, live (inhabit), hover, tarry...
20 Movement (unbounded) : ascend, walk, stroll ; go (on)...
21
”
(bounded) : go (=leave) ; arrive, draw (near), sail (for)...
30 Processes (unbounded) : bark, dine, help, happen,strive, worry ...
31 Processes (bounded) : build, kill, cook, make(up) ; give, deliver, obtain ; cause ; marry...
32 Processes (bounded, progressive) : grow, decline ; become ; recover ; learn...
33 Processes (unbounded, descriptive - adjectival) : bloom, glow, bleed, flourish, sleep...
N.B. Verb meaning is ascribed in context : some lexical items can belong to more than one class : go (leave), go
(progress). Metaphoric meaning is not considered apart, but real homonyms are differentiated (own : possess/
confess). 32 and 33 are indicative subclasses of 31 and 30 respectively
Ts VERB FORM (“ tense ”, etc.)
0 Bare stem (infinitive, imperative, subjunctive)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Present
Past
Perfect
Pluperfect
To infinitive
With modal auxiliary
Passive (modern) : is being tried
Participle (being writing)
“ Modal ” perfect or pluperfect ( I wish I were...) ; also reported speech, etc...
N.B. Some (0,8,9 and even 6) are unfrequent. They can easily be retrieved for further analysis.
S SUBJECT
0 Zero subject
1 1st person
2 2nd person
3 3rd person definite (Mary, he, a visitor, the door)
4 3rd person indefinite (people,anyone, some)
5 it
8. what
126
C “ OBJECT ” COMPLEMENT
N.B. : direct or prepositional ; “ accusative ” for vbs with a “ dative ” complement ; “ goal ” for directional verbs.
0
1
2
3
Zero
Definite
Indefinite
Object clause (that,whether...) or nominalisation or equivalent
4
5
6
8
-ing complement : this linen is wanting washing
Infinitive
Predicative adj. or noun, including well (it is looking nice, she is looking well)
what, where
T TIME COMPLEMENT
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Zero
Present
Past
Future (including subordinate when clause )
Iterative (often, whenever...), continuous (always, never) or generic
“ Time-frame ” (Jespersen). N.B. : 1,2 or 3 are then implied.
“ Extended ” present (today, presently...)
D DURATION and DEGREE
0 Zero (or other than below)
1 Degree : fast, very much, enough ; slowly, little...
2 Unbounded duration (atelic) : for years, long, ever since, still...
4 Bounded duration (telic) : for two years, till now...
Obs OBSERVATIONS
4 Exceptional insertions between be and -ing
5 Remarkable examples
6 Dubious cases
7 Old passives : preparations are making
I
1
2
3
INTIMACY
Close (family circle, close friends)
Friends and relations
More distant connections
AUT AUTHOR
YEAR YEAR
No REFERENCE NUMBER
TEXT TEXT with references (page or letter number, according to the source).
N.B. 1. In the ROMPROG database, for practical reasons (decimal system ; non-exclusiveness of distributions, etc.),
some groupings under a given label (e.g. time complement and duration or H) are not strictly coherent. 2. Some
points are just supplementary information, sometimes redundant. 3. This research framework was not completely
exploited and does not claim theoretical significance.
VERB LISTS
127
Polysemic verbs
See also : list of verbs belonging to several classes.
Verb
Class
ABSORB1
ABSORB2
ASSIST1
ASSIST2
BEAR1
BEAR2
BEG1
BEG2
BURN1
BURN2
CALL1
CALL2
CALL3
CROSS1
CROSS2
DECLINE1
DECLINE2
DESIRE1
DESIRE2
DIE1
DIE2
DRAW1
DRAW2
DRAW3
DRAW4
DRIVE1
DRIVE2
ENLARGE1
ENLARGE2
FEEL1
FEEL2
FIND1
FIND2
FLIT1
FLIT2
FLY1
FLY2
GET1
GET2
GET3
HANG1
HANG2
HOUSE1
HOUSE2
INSIST1
INSIST2
KEEP1
KEEP2
LABOUR1
LABOUR2
31
30
30
30
30
21
2
30
31
33
30
30
2
21
21
32
2
5
2
31
5
30/31
21
30/31
20/21
30
31
30
30
3
31
3
20/21
31
20/21
30
31/32
32
21
10
31
30
31
30
2
30
10
30
33
Meaning
let in, imbibe
interest, engross
help
be present
hold, carry
sail
ask
mendicant
set fire to ;trans.
be on fire
hail
visit
name
walk, etc. across
cancel, delete
decrease, dwindle (intr.)
refuse
wish
ask, urge
expire
long, desire
pull
come, approach
sketch, paint
31
write a cheque
progress on some vehicle
push, hit with, etc.
make larger
expatiate ; speak at length
touch
have the feeling of
discover
be aware of
move quickly...
remove : transitive
birds, etc.
flags, etc.
obtain
become
advance
be suspended
suspend
contain
store in
emphasize, stress
urge
retain
stay (home,etc.)
work
suffer
128
LIE1
LIE2
LIVE1
LIVE2
LOOK1
LOOK2
MEDITATE1
MEDITATE2
PASS1
PASS2
PASS3
PASS4
RESOLVE1
RESOLVE2
ROLL1
ROLL2
ROLL3
ROLL4
SET1
SET2
SHARE
SHARE 31
SMOKE1
SMOKE2
SPEND1
SPEND2
STAMP1
STAMP2
STEAL1
STEAL2
STIR1
STIR2
STOP1
STOP2
TEAR1
TEAR2
THREATEN
THREATEN1
THINK1
THINK2
TRUST1
TRUST2
WEAR1
WEAR2
10
30
10
30
30
30
30
5
20/21
30
30
31
31
31
20
30
30
30
31
21
30
divide
33
30
30
30
31
30
31
21
30
20
31
10
31
20
5
30
30
5
2
31
30
32
in bed, etc.
tell lies
dwell
be alive
gaze
have the appearance of
ponder, think
arrange in advance
move past
spend (time, etc.)
happen
enact
turn into, dissolve
decide
move like a ball
ship
thunder
cause to revolve
install, set up
go, go down(sun)
have in common
emit smoke
a cigar, etc.
pass time
use up (money, etc.)
put a stamp on
on the ground
rob
go away
shake ; transitive
move ; be up
arrest ; transitive
stay
rip, cut
run fast
be imminent
menace
have in the mind
anticipate
have confidence
entrust
clothes
become worn
Aspectual classes
State
Cl. 1
BE
BELONG
DETAIN
HAVE
Cl. 2 (ctd)
Cl.2 (ctd)
Cl.3
BID
BLESS
BLESS
CALL3
PRESCRIBE
PRESUME
PROMISE
PRONOUNCE
BELIEVE
DOUBT
HEAR
MISUNDERSTd
129
OWE
PROVE
Cl.2
ACCUSE
ACKNOWLEDGE
ACQUIESCE
ADVERT
ADVISE
AFFIRM
AGREE
ALLEGE
ALLUDE
ANNOUNCE
APOLOGIZE
ASSERT
BEG1
BEG2
BESEECH
CONFESS
CONFIRM
CONGRATULATE
CONJECTURE
COUNSEL
DECLARE
DECLINE2
DESIRE
ENJOIN
ENTREAT
EXHORT
FORGIVE
IMPLORE
IMPLY
INSIST
MAINTAIN
NAME
OWN
PERSUADE
PREDICT
PROPHESY
PROPOSE
PROPOUND
PROPOUND
RECOMMEND
REFUSE
REGRET
REMARK
REMARK
REMIND
REQUEST
STATE
SUGGEST
SUPPOSE
SWEAR
THANK
TRUST
URGE
VOW
Prospective-retrospective
CL. 5
AIM
ANTICIPATE
APPREHEND
AWAIT
BEAT UP FOR
BREW
CAST ABOUT
CLAMOUR FOR
CONTEMPLATE
CRAVE
DESIRE
DIE TO/FOR
DREAD
ENTERTAIN
EXPECT
FEAR
FERMENT
FRAME WISHES
GAPE FOR
GIRD OFF FOR
GROAN FOR
Locative (Cl. 10)
HANG
HOVER
KNEEL
LAY
LEAN
SEE
SEEM
Cl.4
GRIEVE
HATE
LIKE
LOVE
PREFER
RESENT
CL.6
HANKER
HATCH
HOPE
HOPE
HUNGER TO
HUNT FOR
INTEND
LANGUISH FOR
LONG
LOOK FOR
LOOK FWD TO
LOOK ON
LOOK OUT FOR
LOOK TO
MEAN
MEDITATE2
MUSE OF
NEED
PANT FOR
PINE FOR
PLAN
LIE1
LINGER
LIVE1
LODGE
PAUSE
PROJECT
PROMISE
PURPOSE
RAVEN FOR
SCHEME
SEEK
SIGH AFTER
SIGH FOR
STARVE TO
STRIVE AFTER
STRIVE FOR
THINK2
THIRST TO/FOR
THREATEN TO
TIRE FOR
TRY FOR
TURN OVER
WAIT
WANT
WEARY FOR/TO
WISH
YEARN
REMAIN
RESIDE
REST
ROOST
SIT
SIT UP
SOJOURN
SQUAT
STAY
STOP2
FORGET
LOOK BACK
RECALL
RECALL
RECALL
REGRET
REPENT
TARRY
130
131
Movement
Cl. 20
ADVANCE
ASCEND
BEAT ABOUT
CANTER
CAPER
CARRY ON
CIRCUIT
CIRCULATE
CRAWL
CREEP
CRUISE
CUT ACROSS
DANCE
DRAW2
DRIFT
FLEET
GALLOP
GAMBOL
GET ON
GLIDE
HOBBLE
HOP
JAUNT
JIG
JOG
JOURNEY
LEAP
MAKE WAY
MARCH
MOUNT
PACE
PADDLE
PATROL
PERAMBULATE
PLOD
PLY
PROGRESS
PROWL
RAISE
RANGE
REPASS
REVOLVE
RIDE
ROAM
ROVE
ROW
RUSH
SAUNTER
Cl. 21
SCALE
SCAMPER
SCRAMBLE
SHIFT
SKATE
SKIM
SLAP ALONG
SLEIGH
SLIDE
SLIP
SOAR
SPANK AWAY
SPIN ON
SPRAWL
STAGGER
STALK
STAMP
STRAGGLE
STROLL
STRUT
STUMP ABOUT
SWIM
TACK
TEAR2
THREAD AWAY
TOIL
TOUR
TRAVERSE
TROT
TRUDGE
TRUDGE
TUMBLE
VAGABOND
VEER
WADE
WAG
WARP
WAVER
WHEEL
WHIRL
WIN WAY
WIND
WING
WORK UP
WORK UP
ZIGZAG
ZIG-ZAG-ZIG
APPROACH
ARISE
ARRIVE
BEAR2
BEND O’S STEPS
CLAMBER
CLEAR THE BAR
COME
COME BACK
COME DOWN
COME IN
COME OFF
COME OUT
COME OUT
COME ROUND
COME UP
CROSS1
DEPART
DESCEND
ENTER
ESCAPE
FLEE
GET1
GET3
GO AWAY
GO BACK
GO DOWN
GO OFF
GO OUT
GO ROUND
GO TO BED
KNEEL DOWN
LAUNCH
LEAVE
NIGH
OVERSTEP
PENETRATE
PRESS AWAY
PUT OFF
QUIT
REACH
REASCEND
RECUR
REMOVE
RETREAT
RETURN
RISE
SET
SET FOR
SET IN
SET OFF
SET OUT
SIT DOWN
STAND UP
START
STEAL
STEP
TEND
TIVY OFF
TRIP OFF
132
Double-class verbs
(unbounded/bounded predications)
Cl. 20-21
CLIMB
COME ON
DRIVE1
FLIT1
FLOW
STARVE
GAD
GLIDE
GO
GO ON
SURVEY
HASTEN
SWALLOW
HURRY
JUMP
MOVE
PASS
PLUNGE
THRESH
PLY
PROCEED
THRUST
RAMBLE
TRANSLATE
ROLL1
TRANSPORT
RUN
SAIL
TUMBLE
STAMP
STEER
STEP
STRIDE
TRAVEL
TURN
WALK
WANDER
WHIRL
Cl.30-31
ADMINISTER
ARRANGE
BEGIN
BESTOW
BLOW
DO
DRAW1
DRAW3
DRINK
DRIVE2
MOW
NET
NURSE
PANT
PAINT
SOW
SPEND2
SPIN
STAMP
BURN1
BURST
BUY
CALCULATE
EAT
ENCLOSE
ENGAGE
ENLARGE
PASS2
PASS3
PASS4
PAVE
STRIKE
SUBMIT
SUCK
CARRY
EXCITE
PAY
CAST
CATCH
CAUSE
CHANGE
CLEAN
FALL
FORM
FUME
FERMENT
GAD
PICK
PLY
PRESUME
PRINT
PROCEED
SWEEP
SWING
TAKE
TEAR1
COBBLE
COIN
GATHER
GET1
PROMISE
PROVIDE
THROW
COLLECT
GET2
PUBLISH
COMPOSE
GIVE
PUSH
CONTRIVE
COOK
HAMMER
HOUSE
PUT
RAISE
TRIM
COPY
CORRECT
COVER
CRY
CUT
DEFER
DELIVER
DEVISE
DEVOUR
DIG
DIGEST
DISSECT
DIVIDE
HURRY
ISSUE
ITCH
KNIT
KNOCK
LAY
LEAD
LET
LOSE
LUG
MAKE
MEASURE
MOVE
READ
REAP
RECEIVE
REVISE
ROAST
RUN
SCOUR
SCRAPE
SCRIBBLE
SEND
SET
SEW
SHARE
TURN
USE
WARM
WASH
WASTE
WATER
WEED
WHILE
WHIRL
WORK
WRING
WRITE
133
Process verbs
Unbounded predications
Cl. 30
ABET
ABSORB2
ABUSE
ACCELERATE
ACCOMPANY
ACT
PROCRASTINATE
ADDLE
ADDRESS
ADMIRE
ADVERTISE
AFFECT
AFFLICT
AFFORD
AGITATE
AID
AIR
ALARM
AMUSE
ANATHEMATIZE
ANGLE
ANNOY
ANSWER
APOSTATIZE
APPLY
ARGUE
ASCRIBE
ASK
ASK FOR
ASSAIL
ASSAULT
ASSIST
ASSIST AT
ASSUME
ATTACK
ATTEMPT
ATTEND
ATTITUDINIZE
ATTRACT
AVOID
BABBLE
BACKBITE
BACKSLIDE
BAIT
BALANCE
BANG
BARGAIN
BARK
DELIGHT
DELVE
DEMONSTRATE
DEMUR
DEPLORE
DEPRECATE
HUG
HUGGER MUGGER
HUM
HUMOUR
HUNT
HURL
PREVAIL
PREY
PRICK
PRIZE
PROCEED
DEPRECIATE
DESCRIBE
DESECRATE
DESERVE
DETECT
DEVISE
DEVOTE
DICTATE
DIG
DIGEST
DIGRESS
DILATE
DIN
DINE
DIP
DIRECT
DIRECT
DISCHARGE
DISCOURSE
DISCUSS
DISPARAGE
DISPERSE
DISPUTE
DISSECT
DISTINGUISH
DISTRUST
DISTURB
DO ABOUT
DOCTOR
DOG
DOSE
DOTE
DOZE
DRAG
DRAWL
DREAM
DRILL
DRIP
DROOP
DRUDGE
DRUM
HURRY
HURT
HYBERNATE
HYMN AWAY
HYPERBOLIZE
IDLE
ILL TREAT
IMAGINE
IMBIBE
IMITATE
IMPART OSF
IMPASSION
IMPORTUNE
IMPOSE
IMPUTE
INCLINE
INCONVENIENCE
INCROACH
INDICATE
INDULGE
INFLICT
INFLICT
INHABIT
INJURE
INQUIRE
INSPECT
INTEREST
INTERFERE
INTRIGUE
INTRUDE
INVEIGH
INVESTIGATE
INVITE
INVOKE
IRON
ISSUE
ITCH
JAMMER
JAR
JARGON
JAW AWAY
PROFER
PROFIT
PROMPT
PROPAGATE
PROSE
PROSECUTE
PROTECT
PROTEST
PRY
PUDDLE
PUFF
PULL
PUMP
PURR
PURSUE
PUT UP
PUZZLE
QUACK
QUADRILLE
QUARREL
QUAVER
QUESTION
QUILL DRIVE
QUIZ
QUOTE
RACK
RACKET
RADIATE
RAGE
RAKE
RALLY2
RANSACK
RANT
RAP
RASP
RATTLE
RAVE
REACT
REAP
REAR
REASON
134
BASK
BATHE
BATTER
BATTLE
BAWL
BEAR WITNESS
BEAT
BEAR1
BEFRIEND
BEG2
BEGUILE
BEHAVE
BELABOUR
BELEAGUE
BELIE
BELLOW
BEMOAN
BEND
BENEFIT
BESET
BESIEGE
BESTIR OSF
BEWAIL
BILE
BITE
BLACKBALL
BLAME
BLAME
BLASPHEME
BLEND
BLUBBER
BLUNDER
BLUSTER
BOARD
BOAST
BOB
BORE1
BORROW
BOTANIZE
BOTHER
BRAG
BRAVE
BRAWL
BRAY
BREAKFAST
BREATHE
BREED
BREW
BRIDGE
BRIGHTEN
BROOD
BUFFET
BUMP
BUOY UP
BURBLE
BUSTLE ABOUT
DUN
DWELL
EARN
EARTHQUAKE
EAT THEIR TERMS
ELECTIONEER
EMBITTER
EMBLAZON
EMBRACE
EMPLOY
ENACT
ENCORE
ENCOURAGE
ENDEAVOUR
ENDURE
ENFORCE
ENJOY
ENLIVEN
ENNUY
ENQUIRE
ENTERTAIN
ENUMERATE
ENVY
ESCORT
EULOGIZE
EXAGGERATE
EXAMINE
EXCEED
EXCHANGE
EXCITE
EXCLAIM
EXEMPLIFY
EXERCISE
EXERT
EXHIBIT
EXIST
EXPATIATE
EXPERIENCE
EXPERIMENT
EXPERIMENTALIZE
EXPIATE
EXPLAIN
EXPLORE
EXPOSE
EXPOUND
EXPRESS
EXTOLL
EXULT
EYE
FAG
FAINT
FALL BEHIND
FAN
FANCY
FARE
FAST
JEST
JINGLE
JOKE
JOLLYFY
JOSTLE
JUDGE
JUGGLE
JUGULATE
JUMBLE ABOUT
JUSTIFY
JUSTIFY
KEEP
KICK
KISS
LABOUR1
LAKE
LAMENT
LAUGH
LEAN
LECTURE
LEGACY-HUNT
LIBEL
LICK
LIE2
LIGHTEN
LIONIZE
LISTEN
LIVE2
LOATHE
LOITER
LOLL
LOOK AFTER
LOOK1
LOOK2
LOUNGE
LUG
LUNCH
LURK
MAINTAIN
MAKE BELIEVE
MAKE UP FOR
MAKE UP TO
MANAGE
MANIFEST
MANOEUVRE
MANT
MANTLE
MARK
MARVEL
MEDDLE
MEDIATE
MEDITATE1
MEET
MENTION
METAPHYSICIZE
MILK
REBEL
REBUKE
RECITE
RECKON
RECLINE
RECONNOITRE
RECREATE
RECRUIT
REEL
REFER
REFLECT
REFRAIN
REGALE
REJOICE
RELATE
RELAX
RELENT
RELY
REMONSTRATE
REPEAT
REPEL
RE-PERUSE
REPORT
REPOSE
REPROACH
REPROBATE
REQUIRE
REREAD
RE-READ
RESIST
REST
REVEL
REVERIE
REVERSE
REVIEW
REVILE
REVOLVE
RIDDLE
RIFLE-SHOOT
RING
RIOT
RISK
ROAR
ROAST
ROB
ROCK OSF
ROLL2
ROLL3
ROLL4
ROLLICK
ROMANCE
ROMP
ROUT
ROW
RUB
RULE
135
BUSY OSF
BUZZ
BUZZ
CACKLE
CALL1
CALL2
CALOMEL
CANT
CANTABRIGIANIZE
CANVASS
CARE
CARE
CARESS
CARP AT
CARRY ON
CARRY OUT
CAST O S EYE
CAST UP
CAUSE
CELEBRATE
CHAFE
CHALLENGE
SENTIMENTALIZE
CHANT
CHASE
CHAT
CHATTER
CHEAT
CHEAT
CHERISH
CHEW
CHIDE
CHIME
CHIRP
CHOP
CHRISTMAS
CHUCKLE
CHURN
CLAIM
CLANG
CLASH
CLATTER
CLAW
CLING
COAST
COGITATE
COIN
COLLOQUE
COMBAT
COME IN FOR
COMFORT
COMMUNE
COMPARE
COMPARE
COMPLAIN
COMPLIMENT
FATIGUE
FEAST
FEED
FEEL
FEEL FOR
FENCE
FERMENT
FIDGET
FIGHT
FIGURE
FILL
FIND2
FINESSE
FINGER
FIRE
FISH
FLAG
FLATTER
FLAUNT
FLIT2
FLOAT
FLOUNDER
MIND
MINE AT
MISCHARGE
MISHAPPEN
MISJUDGE
MISLEAD
MISLUCK
MISS
MISTAKE
MIX
MOAN
MOIL
MOLEST
MONOPOLIZE
MOPE
MOUNT GUARD
MOURN
MOVE
MOW
MUDDLE
MURMUR
MUSE
RUMBLE
RUMINATE
RUMMAGE
RUN
RUSTLE
SAY
SCAN
SCATTER
SCHEME
SCOLD
SCOOP
SCOUR
SCRAPE
SCRATCH
SCRAWL
SCREAM
SCREECH
SCREW UP
SCRUB
SEARCH
SEIZE
FLUCTUATE
FLURRY
FLUSTER
FLUTTER
FLY
FOLLOW
FONDLE
FOOL
FOOT
FORAGE
FORBEAR
FORCE
FORK
FREQUENT
FRET
FROLICK
FRONT
FROWN
FUME
GAD
GAFFAY
GALL
GALLANT
GALLIVANT
GALLOP-SCRAWL
GAMBLE
GAPE
GARGLE
GASLIGHT
GASP
GAZE
GET ON
GET3
MYSTIFY
NAME
NEGLECT
NEGOCIATE
NET
NIBBLE
NOURISH
OBEY
OBSERVE
OCCUPY
OFFEND
OFFER
OFFICIATE
OOZE
OPERATE
OPPOSE
OPPRESS
ORDER
OVERFLOWER
OVERGUARD
OVERLOOK
OVERPOWER
OVERSTRAIN
OVERWHELM
OVERWORK
PANT
PAPER
PARADE
PARLEY
PATRONIZE
PAY VISIT
PEAL
PECK
SERMONIZE
SERVE
SET UP FOR
SHAKE
SHAKE HANDS
SHAM
SHED
SHELL
SHELTER
SHEW
SHILLY SHALLY
SHOCK
SHOOT
SHOP
SHOUT
SHOW
SHRIEK
SHRINK
SHUFFLE
SHY
SIGH
SIGHTSEE
SIMMER
SIN
SKETCH
SKIM
SLAM
SLASH
SLAVE
SLIP
SMELL
SMILE
SMOKE2
136
COMPLY
CON OVER
CONDUCT
CONFINE OSF
CONFOUND
CONFUSE
CONSIDER
CONSOLE
CONSTERNATE
CONSULT
CONSULT
CONTEMN
CONTEMPLATE
CONTEND
CONTEST
CONTINUE
CONTRADICT
SPEC.CONSTABLE
CONTRAST
CONTRIBUTE
CONVERSE
CONVEY
COQUETTE
CORRESPOND
COUGH
COUNT
COUNT ON
COURT
COVET
COWER
CRACK ON
CRACKLE
CRAVE
CREAK
CRIMP
CRITICIZE
CROSS EXAMINE
CROW
CRUSADE
CUDDLE
CUDGEL
CULTIVATE
CURL
CURSE
DABBLE
DAGUERREOTYPE
DALLY
DANGLE
DARN
DASH
DAWDLE
DEAL
DEBATE
DECLAIM
DEDICATE
DEER HUNT
GIVE EAR
GIVE ONE S MIND
GIVE OSF TO
GIVE OUT
GIVE VENT TO
GLANCE
GLAR
GLEAN
GLORY
GNAW
GO WRONG
GOGGLE
GOVERN
GRAPPLE
GREET
GRIN
GRIND
PEEP
PEER
PEG AWAY
PELT
PEN
PERFORM
PERK
PERORATE
PERPLEX
PERSECUTE
PERSEVERE
PERUSE
PESTER
PET
PHOTOGRAPH
PICK
PICKLE
SNEER
SNEEZE
SNIFF
SNORE
SNORT
SOAK
SOAP
SOB
SOLACE
SOLICIT
SOLILOQUIZE
SOOTHE
SOUND
SPAR
SPARE
SPEAK
GROAN
GROPE
GROWL
GRUMBLE
GRUNT
GUESS
GUIDE
GUZZLE
HAIL
HALLOO
HALT
HAPPEN
HARANGUE
HARASS
HARP
HARROW
HARVEST
HAUL
HAUNT
HAWL
HEAL
HEALTHIFY OSF
HEAVE
HELP
HESITATE
HIDE
HIGGLE
HINDER
HINT
HISS
HISTORIFY
HIT
HOE
HOLD
HOLIDAY MAKE
HOMOEOPATHIZE
HONE
HOUSE
PICTURE-SEE
PINE
PIONEER
PIPE
PIQUE OSF
PIRATE
PITCH
PITY
PLAGUE
PLASH
PLASH
PLASTER
PLAY
PLEAD
PLEASE
PLOT
PLOUGH
PLUISTER ALONG
PLY
POACH
POETIZE
POINT
POKE
POLK
PONDER
POP
PORE
POSTURE
POUR
POWDER AWAY
PRACTISE
PRAISE
PRATTLE
PRAY
PREACH
PRESENT OSF
PRESIDE
PRESS
SPECULATE
SPEND1
SPEND2
SPIT
SPLASH
SPORT
SPOUT
SPRAWL
SPURN
SPURT
SPY
SQUABBLE
SQUEEZE
SQUIRE
SQUIRT
STAGNATE
STAMMER
STAND
STAND OUT
STAND TO
STARE
START UP¨
STICK
STIMULATE
STING
STIR1
STIR2
STOOP
STORM
STRAIN
STREAM
STRETCH
STRIVE
STRUGGLE
STUDY
STUMBLE
STUN
SUBJECT
137
DEFEND
DELIBERATE
HOUSE HUNT
HOWL
PRESUME
PRETEND
SUCKLE
SUCK-SUCK
138
Process verbs
Bounded predications
Cl. 31
ABOLISH
ABRIDGE
ABSTRACT
ACCEPT
ACCOMPLISH
ADD
ADOPT
ALIGHT
ALLOW
AMPLIFY
ANCHOR
APPEAR
ARRAY
ASSIMILATE
ATTAIN
ATTRIBUTE
AWAKE
AWAKEN
BAPTIZE
BEGIN
BIND
BLISTER
BORE2
BRAID
BRING
BROIL
BUILD
BURK
BURY
CALCINE
CAST ANCHOR
CEASE
CEMENT
CHOOSE
CLEAR
CLEAVE
CLOSE
COIN
COMBINE
COMMENCE
COMMISSION
COMMIT
COMPILE
COMPLETE
COMPOSE OSF
COMPOUND
COMPROMISE
COMPUTE
DRIFT
DROP
DROWN
DRY
DYKE
EDIT
EDUCATE
EMBARK
EMBEZZLE
EMBROIDER
EMPTY
END
ENDANGER
ENGRAVE
ENRICH
ENTER
ERECT
ESTABLISH
ETCH
EVADE
EXCLUDE
EXECUTE
EXPEL
EXTERMINATE
EXTRACT
EXTRICATE
FABRICATE
FALL IN WITH
FALL IN WITH
FASHION
FATTEN
FEATHER
FETE
FIND1
FINISH
FIT
FIX
FLEDGE
FLING
FOLD
FORGE
FORSAKE
FORTIFY
FORWARD
FOUND
FRAME
FRANK
FREE OSF
LAND
LEAVE
LEVEL
LIGHT UP
LOAD
MAKE UP O S MIND
MANUFACTURE
MARRY
MASTER
MATURE
MEDICINIZE
MEND
MISDATE
MODEL
MODIFY
MOULD
MOULDER
MURDER
NAIL UP
NERVE
NEW ROOF
NOTE
NUMBER
OBTAIN
OCCASION
OMIT
OPEN
ORGANIZE
ORIGINATE
OVERCOME
PACK
PART
PASS1
PEEL
PERISH
PERVERT
PILE
PLACE
PLANT
PLUCK
POLISH
POLLUTE
POST
POSTPONE
PRECLUDE
PREPARE
PRESENT
PREVENT
ROT
ROUND OFF
RUB UP
RUIN
RUMMAGE UP
RUN MAD
RUN OVER
SACRIFICE
SATISFY
SAVE
SAW
SCLAW
SCREEN
SEAT
SECURE
SEE
SEEK UP
SELL
SEPARATE
SET OFF
SET TO
SETTLE
SHAKE OFF
SHAPE
SHAVE
SHIFT
SHUT
SKIP
SLAUGHTER
SLING
SMASH
SMELT
SMOOTHE
SNIP
SORT
SPIER OUT
SPILL
SPLIT
SPOIL
SPUD UP
SQUANDER
SQUEAL OFF
START
START
STEAL
STITCH
STOP1
STOW IN
139
CONCEIVE
CONCOCT
CONFER
CONFIRM
CONNECT
CONSTRUCT
CONSUME
COVENANT
CRAM
CREATE
CROSS2
CROWN
CURE
DAD
DARKEN
DEAFEN
DECEIVE
DECIDE
DEFER
DEGRADE
DELAY
DELINEATE
DELUDE
DEPRIVE
DESERT
DESPATCH
DESPOIL
DESTROY
DETAIN
DETERMINE
DIE
DIGEST
DISAPPEAR
DISAPPOINT
DISCOMPOSE
DISCOVER
DISENGAGE
DISMANTLE
DISMISS
DISPATCH
DISPOSE
DISSIPATE
DISSOLVE
DISTRESS
DISTRIBUTE
DO AWAY WITH
DOUBLE
DRAIN
DRAW4
DRESS
FREEZE
FRY
FULFIL
FULFILL
FUME
FURBISH
FURNISH
GAIN
GET IN
GET UP
GIRD ON
GIRDLE IN
GIVE BIRTH TO
GIVE RISE TO
GIVE UP
GO OFF
GRANT
GRAVEL
HALF OPEN
HAND
HANG
HARNESS
HEAP
HEW
HOARD
HUNGER
ILLUSTRATE
IN
INCREASE
INCULCATE
INDITE
INFORM
INITIATE
INSCRIBE
INSERT
INSTIGATE
INSTITUTE
INTER
INTERPRET
INTERRUPT
INTERWEAVE
INTRODUCE
INVENT
INVEST
INVOLVE
JOIN
JOT DOWN
KICK OFF
KILL
KICK OFF
PROCURE
PRODUCE
PROMULGATE
PULL DOWN
PUNISH
PURCHASE
PUT OFF
PUT OUT
PUT TO
QUIET
RAVAGE
REACH UP
REALIZE
REAPPEAR
REARRANGE
RECOPY
RECORD
REDUCE
REFORM
REFRESH
REGILD
REKINDLE
RELAPSE
RELIEVE
REMAKE
REMEDY
REMOVE
RENDER
RENEW
REPAINT
REPAIR
REPAY
REPRINT
REPRODUCE
REPUBLISH
RESCUE
RESELL
RESERVE
RESOLVE1
RETAIN
RETARD
RETIRE
RETOUCH
RETRANSCRIBE
RETRIM
RETURN
REWARD
RIP OPEN
ROOF
ROOT OUT
STRANGLE
STRIP
STUFF
SUBDUE
SUBMIT
SUBORN
SUBSCRIBE
SUBSTITUTE
SUCCEED
SUFFOCATE
SUM UP
SUPPLY
SWEAR IN
THATCH
TIDY
TIE
TRAIN
TRANSCRIBE
TRANSFER
TRANSFORM
TRANSMIT
TUNE
TWITCH
UNBURTHEN
UNCOVER
UNDERMINE
UNDO
UNDRESS
UNLOAD
UNPACK
UNTIE
VICTUAL
WAKE
WARP
WEAN
WEAR2
WEAVE
WET
WHET
WIN
WIND UP
WINK OUT
WITHDRAW
WREATHE
WRIGGLE OFF
WRONG
YIELD
ZINCIFY
140
Verbs belonging to several classes
Only by reference to the context can this class cleavage be understood : the implied difference of meaning may
vary ; sometimes two or several meanings are subsumed by a common lexical label : e.g. contemplate : consider,
plan ; name : appoint a day, call ; rest :stay, relax ; stand : “ posture ”, tolerate ; etc. Classes 32 and 33 are not to
be taken as very strict. This list of homonyms covers some of the main cases.
BREAK
BREW
BRIGHTEN
BROIL
CHANGE
CONFIRM
CONTEMPLATE
COVER
CRAVE
DARKEN
DESIRE
DETAIN
DISMISS
DRAG
DRAIN
DROP
DRY
EMPTY
ENTER
ENTERTAIN
FALL
FILL
FLY
FORM
FREEZE
FUME
GAIN
GATHER
GET ON
GET UP
GET1
GET2
GET3
HANG
HATCH
INCREASE
LAY
LEAN
LEAVE
30
5
30
31
30
2
5
31
5
31
2
1
31
30
31
31
31
31
21
5
30
30
20
30
31
30
31
31
20
31
21
30
21
10
5
31
10
10
21
31 32
LOOK UP
30
LOSE
32
MAINTAIN
33
MELT
31 32
MEND
31
NAME
30
PASS1
33
PROMISE
30
PROTRACT
32
QUIET
5
RAISE
31
REGRET
32
RELAX
32
REST
32
RETREAT
32
RETURN
32
SCHEME
32
SET
31
SHIFT
30
SKIM
31 32
SLIP
32
SPRAWL
21 30 33 STAND
31 32
START
31 33
STARVE
31
STEAL
32
STICK
32
STRETCH
30 32
SWELL
32
SWIM
30 31 32 TOIL
31 32
TUMBLE
30 32
TURN
31
WARP
31
WASTE
32
WAVER
30 31
WEAR2
30
WHEEL
31
WIN
WRITHE
30
31
2
32
31
2
20
2
30
31
20
2
30
10
21
21
5
21
20
20
20
20
10
21
31
21
30
30
30
20
20
20
21
20
30
20
31
20
31
30
32
32
30
33
32
30
21 31
5
32
32
30 31
6
32
30
32
31
30
30 31
31
30
30
30
30
31
33
31
33
32
32
30
30
30
30 3132
31
31 32
30
32
30
32
33
141
Periods and decades
The whole time-span (exactly 1787-1880) was originally divided into periods of five years, but, the letters for the
end periods being in small number, 1787-1799 was counted for one period, and the few letters dated after 1880 have
been added to period 17.
In many cases, data have been computed by decades according to the table below, where the three last periods have
been fused, to compensate for smaller corpus size.
Periods
Dates
1.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1787-1799
1800-1804
1805-1809
1810-1814
1815-1819
1820-1824
1825-1829
1830-1834
1835-1839
1840-1844
1845-1849
1850-1854
1855-1859
1860-1864
1865-1869
1870-1874
1875-1880
Decades
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. General density, by decades.
Figure 2. Density for men and women, by decades.
Figure 3. Densities, by equivalent chronological lots.
Figure 4. Individual densities for women, in order of birth
Figure 5. Individual densities for men, in order of birth.
Figure 6. Trajectories : Lake group.
Figure 7. Trajectory of William Wordsworth : 1800-1850.
Figure 8. Trajectories of the Lake Poets : 1800-1835.
Figure 9. Trajectories of Scott and Wordsworth
Figure 10. Trajectories of Jane Austen and the Lake poets.
Figure 11. Trajectories of Dickens, Thackeray and Gaskell.
Figure 12. Trajectory of Mrs Gaskell.
Figure 13. Trajectory of Thackeray.
Figure 14. Trajectory of Dickens.
Figure 15. Trajectory of Macaulay.
Figure 16. Trajectory of Carlyle (early periods).
Figure 17. Trajectories of the Brownings.
Figure 18. Trajectory of George Eliot.
Figure 19. State verbs : cumulated densities, by decades.
142
Figure 20. Prospective & retrospective verbs : densities by decades.
Figure 21. Locative & movement verbs and general density (adjusted), by decades.
Figure 22. Process verbs and general density, by decades.
Figure 23. Density of major classes, by decades.
Figure 24. Percentage of major classes, by decades.
Figure 25. Percentage of major tenses, by decades.
Figure 26. The two passives, by decades.
Figure 27. Number of lexical units, by frequencies, for groups A and B.
Figure 28. Extended present : adjusted densities.
Figure 29. Have.
Figure 30. Modal auxiliaries.
Figure 31. Shall & will.
Figure 32. May & might.
Figure 33. Must.
Figure 34. Density in Jane Austen’s letters and novels.
Figure 35. Density in Macaulay’s Letters and History.
Figure 36. Mrs Gaskell’s letters to Marianne and novels.
Figure 37. The progressive across three centuries
143
FIGURES
400
343
305
300
278
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
219
200
209
190
158
140
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
Decades
6
7
8
144
Figure 1. General density, by decades.
400
359
299
300
272
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
236
236
234
218
200
193
172
183
177
173
147
117
100
97
0
Decades
Men
Women
169
145
Figure 2. Density for men and women, by decades.
400
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
300
200
100
<1805
1815
1825
1835
1845
1855
1880
Chronology
Density all
D women
D men
Figure 3. Densities, by equivalent chronological lots.
400
358
350
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
320
303
300
266
250
217
200
185
177
158
157
150
205
100
50
0
EDG
MAW
DOW
HUT
AUS
RUM
Densities
WEL
EBB
GAS
ELI
146
Figure 4. Individual densities for women, in order of birth.
345
350
326
322
300
271
259
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
250
225
200
150
176
144
179
157
132
107
100
50
0
WMW SCO
COL
SOU
RUJ
CAR
KEA
Densities
MAC
THA
DIC
BRO
RUS
147
Figure 5. Individual densities for men, in order of birth.
600
500
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
400
300
200
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
MAW
WMW
6
7
Periods (1800-50)
HUT
COL
8
9
DOW
SOU
10
11
12
148
Figure 6. Trajectories : Lake group.
400
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
300
200
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Decades
Figure 7. Trajectory of William Wordsworth : 1800-1850.
300
250
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
200
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Periods (1800-1835)
WMW
COL
DOW
7
8
149
Figure 8. Trajectories of the Lake Poets : 1800-1835.
200
180
160
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
D. Sco
5
Periods
6
D. WmW
7
8
9
150
Figure 9. Trajectories of Scott and Wordsworth.
400
D
e 300
n
s
i 200
t
i
e 100
s
0
1
2
3
4
5
Periods (1790-1820)
D. Aus
D. Col
D. WmW
D. Sou
Figure 10. Trajectories of Jane Austen and the Lake poets.
600
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
500
400
300
200
4
5
6
7
Decades (1825-70)
GAS
DIC
THA
General Density
8
9
151
Figure 11. Trajectories of Dickens, Thackeray and Gaskell.
500
400
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
300
200
100
0
8
9
10
11
12
Periods (1830-65)
13
14
15
10
11
Periods (1825-65)
12
13
14
Figure 12. Trajectory of Mrs Gaskell.
500
400
D
e
n 300
s
i
t
i 200
e
s
100
0
7
8
9
152
Figure 13. Trajectory of Thackeray.
500
400
D
e
n 300
s
i
t
i 200
e
s
100
0
9
10
11
Figure 14. Trajectory of Dickens.
12
13
Periods (1835-70)
14
15
16
153
300
250
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
200
150
100
50
0
4
5
6
7
8
9
Periods (1810-60)
10
11
12
13
Figure 15. Trajectory of Macaulay.
300
250
D
e 200
n
s
i 150
t
i
e 100
s
50
0
5
6
7
Periods (1815-40)
8
9
154
Figure 16. Trajectory of Carlyle (early periods).
300
250
D
200
e
n
s
i 150
t
i
e
100
s
50
0
10
11
12
Periods (1840-65)
EBB
13
BRO
14
155
Figure 17. Trajectories of the Brownings.
400
D 300
e
n
s
i 200
t
i
e
s 100
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
Periods (1835-1880)
Figure 18. Trajectory of George Eliot.
15
16
17
156
16,00
14,00
12,00
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
10,00
8,00
6,00
4,00
2,00
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Decades
Cl 1
Cl 3
Cl 2
Cl 4
Figure 19. State verbs : cumulated densities, by decades.
24,95
25,00
22,62
20,00
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
16,11
15,54
15,00
13,75
12,43
10,00
8,45
8,06
5,00
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
Decades
6
7
8
157
Figure 20. Prospective and retrospective verbs : densities, by decades.
120,00
100,00
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
80,00
60,00
40,00
20,00
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Decades
D 10
D 20+21
Gl D : 3
Figure 21. Locative & movement verbs and general density (adjusted), by decades.
Values for the general density have been divided by 3 to facilitate comparison.
8
158
400
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
300
200
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Decades
D 31+32
D 30+33
Gl D
Figure 22 : Process verbs and general density, by decades.
160
140
120
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Decades
State
Mvt
Prosp-retr
Bd process
Loc
Unb. process
8
159
Figure 23. Density of major classes, by decades.
0,50
0,40
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
0,30
0,20
0,10
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
6
Decades
1-4
20-21
5-6
31-32
10
30-33
7
8
160
Figure 24. Percentage of major classes, by decades
0,60
0,50
0,40
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
0,30
0,20
0,10
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
6
Decades
Pt
Plpfct
Past
Inf
Figure 25. Percentage of major tenses, by decades.
Pfct
Modals
7
8
161
6,00
24
5,00
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
4,00
3,00
38
35
2,00
17
24
10
9
20
22
7
1,00
3
0,00
17
0
1
2
8
5
2
3
4
5
6
Decades
D old
D new
Figure 26. The two passives, by decades.
The figures on the curves refer to the actual number of passives for each decade.
7
8
162
1000
N
b
o
f
900
800
700
600
500
u
n
i
t
s
400
300
200
100
0
Freq
Frequencies
Gr.A
Gr.B
Figure 27. Number of lexical units, by frequencies, for groups A and B.
900
800
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Decades
Gl D
D extpt
7
8
163
Figure 28. Extended present : adjusted densities.
To facilitate comparison of the curves, figures for extended present have been multiplied by 10.
1200
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Decades
Gl Density
D have*100
Figure 29. Have.
To facilitate comparison of the curves, figures for have have been multiplied by 100.
7
8
164
400
D
300
e
n
s
i 200
t
i
e
100
s
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
7
8
Decades
D mod*10
Gl d
Figure 30. Modal auxiliaries.
To facilitate comparison of the curves, figures for the modals have been multiplied by 10.
6,00
5,00
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
4,00
3,00
2,00
1,00
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
Decades
6
165
Figure 31. Shall & will.
4,00
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
3,00
2,00
1,00
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Decades
D ma/mi
Figure 32. May & might.
1,80
1,60
1,40
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
1
2
3
4
5
Decades
6
7
8
166
Figure 33. Must.
500
400
MP
E
1814
1815-17
D
e
300
n
P&P
s
i
200
t
y
100
0
1813
Dates
Novels
Letters
167
Figure 34. Density in Jane Austen’s letters and novels.
P & P : Pride and Prejudice (1813) ; MP : Mansfield Park (1814) ; E : Emma (1816).
300
250
D
e 200
n
s 150
i
t 100
y
50
0
Periode
1840-44
1845-49
Dates
D Letters
Figure 35. Density in Macaulay’s Letters and History.
D History
1850-54
168
600
518
509
500
459
D
&
s
i
z
e
400
C. Phill
334
300
N &S
305
Cranf.
234
MB
190
200
100
39
0
1850
1855
1860
1865
Periods
D Marianne
Wds(thds)
D. novels
Figure 36. Mrs Gaskell’s letters to Marianne and novels.
MB : Mary Barton (1848) ; Cranf. : Cranford : 1853 ; N & S. : North and South (1855) ; C. Phillis and other Tales
(1860, posthumous).
169
Progressives in novels since 1700
By 20-year spans
700
600
D
e
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
500
400
300
200
100
0
1740
1760
1780
1800
1820
1840
1860
1880
1900
1920
1940
1960
1980
Dates (ends of spans)
Densities
Figure 37. The progressive across three centuries.
— —INDEX (Text)
Adamczewski 14; 69
Aitken & McArthur 39
Anderson 92; 99
Archer-Jackson 40; 43
Aristotle 10; 15
Arnaud 1; 6; 11; 15; 25; 26; 32; 44; 45; 46; 50; 51; 55; 69;
86; 89; 92; 93; 94
Austin 13; 79
Bailey 34; 56; 99
Bain 29; 48; 60; 67; 75
Basch 96
Bennett and Partee 62
Benveniste 7; 12; 69
Best 21
Bloomfield 100
Boulle 99
Bourdieu 21
Brorström 36; 39; 48
Buehler 100
Bull 15
Buyssens 14; 69; 70
Chambers 34
Charleston 14; 69; 98
Close 9
Collobert 10; 71
Comrie 64; 92
Culioli 7; 12
Curme 98
De Camp 45
Denison 56; 86
Descartes 10; 76
Desclaire 21
Dorozewski 95
Dowty 62
Eckert 96
Encrevé 21
Gauchat 96
Gérin 43
Givon 98
Goldsmith & Woisetschlaeger 99
Groussier 7; 12
Guillemin-Flescher 86
Gusdorf 98
Guy 95
Haight 23; 26; 85
Hatcher 9; 10; 98; 99
Heine 90; 92; 95
Herzog 4; 36
Hill 15
Humboldt 98
Jakobson 100
Jespersen 19; 58; 59; 69; 99
Joos 14; 15; 46; 76; 79; 81
Kipers 53; 96
Knott 25
Labov 4; 5; 6; 11; 21; 22; 24; 27; 28; 32; 34; 36; 40; 44;
50; 86; 90; 96; 97; 100
Lawton 40
Leech 59; 60; 61; 63; 64; 71
170
Leonard 22; 37
Leskien 44
Ljung 45; 46; 69; 73; 76; 79; 80; 81; 99
Mayhew 39
Meillet 5; 92; 95
Milroy 27
Montague 62; 63
Mossé 10; 25; 37; 40; 57; 58; 98
Murray 58
Nakamura 86
Norman et al. 95
Normand & al 92
Normand et al 44
Nurmi 91
Ota 9; 19; 25; 46; 52; 69; 73
Pagliuca 90
Phillipps 37; 39; 42; 86; 87
Phillips 21; 86; 87
Piaget 15
Raumolin-Brunberg 34
Raybould 37; 87; 88
Romaine 40
Rydén & Brorström 11
Rydén 6; 36; 39; 48
Sag 45
Sankoff 21
Saussure 12; 95; 100
Scheffer 70; 98
Schuchardt 92; 100
Searle 74; 81
Smith 22; 26; 69
Smitterberg 55; 93
Strang 88; 89; 98
Swadesh 46
Tarde 51; 92; 95
Thompson 39
Traugott 90; 99
Tulloch 29; 39; 88; 89
Vendler 7; 73
Vlach 62
Wang 12; 50
Warner 56; 91; 92
Weinreich 4; 36; 90
Weinreich, Labov & Herzog 4
Wright 7; 99
INDEX (Footnotes)
Buyssens 60
—C—
Chartier et al 22
Cobb 17
Culioli 19; 61; 67; 94; 100
—D—
Denison 37; 38; 56
Desclaire 26
Destutt de Tracy 72
Diver 60
Durkheim 95
—G—
Gauchat 23; 34
Görlach 93
Grevisse 90
Grize 100
Groussier 61; 67
Guillemin-Flescher 12; 94
Gusdorf 98
—H—
Hancil 91
Hatcher 7; 73
Herdan 84
Herzog 23
Hill 19
Holmes 42
—I—
Imbs 60
—J—
Jacobson 84
Jespersen 36; 75; 90
Joos 19; 60
Juillard 84
—K—
—A—
Allen 60; 70
Aristotle 17; 46; 48
Arnaud 25; 33; 71; 93; 114
—B—
Bain 8; 39
Benveniste 10; 47
Bergson 8
Biber & Finegan 55
Braconnier 96
Brörstrom 91
Brorström 25
Kay 99
Kenny 15
Klein 9
König 14
Koschmieder 13
—L—
Labov 23; 34; 97
Leech 60
Ljung 16; 74
171
—M—
Mallarmé 84
Marchello-Nizia 6
Mossé 4; 32; 33; 36; 93; 114
Muller 84
Murray 8
Mustanoja 93
—S—
Sag 70
Scheffer 33; 60; 85; 114
Shuy 56
Sjoestedt 37
Smitterberg 4; 7; 14; 55; 56; 91; 94; 118
Stanzel 37
Strang 25; 29; 49; 87; 94; 114
—N—
Nakamura 37; 56
Nehls 4; 93
Nevalainen 1; 4; 21; 25; 110; 111
Nickel 33; 114
Nugent 98
Nurmi 93
—P—
Paul 95
Perelman 13
Perlmutter 47
Phillipps 39
—R—
Raumolin-Brunberg 4; 25
Rivière 61; 67
Romaine 4
Rostand 42
Russell 74; 79; 110
Ruwet 47
Rydén 25; 91
Rydèn & Brörstrom 91
—T—
Tagliamonte 24
Taine 84
Thoiron 84
Tulloch 85
—V—
Van Hamel 37
Vaugelas 90
Vendler 15
Visser 37
—W—
Warner 1; 37; 42; 56; 91; 92; 113
Weinreich 23
Whorf 98
Williams 57
Wright 94
—Y—
Yule 84